From Edward Bridgen

[dateline] London July 13 1781

[salute] Sir

By the direction of our Mutual Friend Mr. Jennings I have sent to Ostend to the Care
of Messrs. Theodoor Van Moorsel & Co. there, a Small packadge of Books Viz: Two Parliamentary
Registers. The principles of Law and Goverment,1 and (by Mistake) a Novell called the Revolution2 which I was not apprized of untill too late.

You will also find 2 large 4to. Volumes of the Memoirs of Thos. Hollis Esqr. sent
you by a Friend to Man.3 2 Small Pamphlets called the Means of National defence by a Free Militia4 those I beg your Acceptance of. One also by a Friend5 of these you may have as Many as you please if you think they will be acceptable
to your Friends.

Be pleased to know that the friend Edmond Jenings takes the liberty to assure you,
Sir that I am allways at your command Yr. very huml. Servt.

1. Principles of Law and Government, with An Inquiry into the Justice and Policy of the
Present War, and the Most Effectual Means of Obtaining ... Peace, London, 1781, is in JA's library at the Boston Public Library (Catalogue of JA's Library).

2. An advertisement for The Revolution, A Novel that appeared in the London Chronicle of 14–16 June stated that “the moral of this Work is founded on the situation of
the kingdom with respect to America and the common enemy.” A notice in the Chronicle of 3–5 July added that “this work is written on the plan of an epic poem.”

3. Francis Blackburne, Memoirs of Thomas Hollis, 2 vols., London, 1780. Thomas Brand Hollis, Thomas Hollis' heir and Blackburne's
patron sent the volumes to JA, but they did not arrive (vol. 10:67–68; see also Edmund Jenings to JA, 17 Sept., below). Only the second volume is in JA's library at the Boston Public Library (Catalogue of JA's Library).

4. Probably [Granville Sharp], Tracts Concerning the Ancient and Only True Legal Means of National Defence, by a
Free Militia, London, 1781. A copy of the 3d edn., London, 1782, is in JA's library at the Boston Public Library (same).

To the President of Congress

I have the honor to inclose Copy of a Letter to the Comte de Vergennes, and Copy of
Articles and an Answer.2

Peace is so desirable an Object, that humanity as well as Policy demands of every
Nation to hearken with Patience and Sincerity to every Proposition which has a tendency
to it, even only in appearance. I cannot however see any symptoms of a sincere disposition
to it in the English. They are endeavouring to administer soporificks to their Enemies:
but they will not succeed. Peace however will never be made by the English while they
make any Figure in the United States.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant.

[signed] J. Adams

RC and enclosures in John Thaxter's hand (PCC, Misc. Papers, Reel No. 1, f. 375–407); endorsed: “Letter July 14. 1781 Paris J. Adams Read Octr.
3. Covering a Discussion of the Propositions of the mediating Powers”; “Paris July
14 1781. J. Adams.” A second copy of this letter and enclosure (PCC, No. 84, III, f. 291–312), written by JA at Paris, reached Philadelphia on 1 March 1782. For the enclosures that went with
the two letters, see note 2.

2. The recipient's copy is accompanied by JA's letter to Vergennes of 13 July and its enclosed response, above, and also by JA's letters to Vergennes of 16, 18, 19, and 21 July and Vergennes' letter of 18 July, all below. The second copy, written at Paris, is accompanied only by copies
of JA's letter to Vergennes of 13 July and its enclosed response.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0313

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-07-15

To the President of Congress

I have the honour to inclose Copy of a Letter to the Comte de Vergennes and of certain
Articles and their Answers.2

The British Court proposed to the Imperial Courts a Congress upon two preliminary
Conditions, the Rupture of the Treaty with France, and the Return of America to their
Obedience. The two Imperial Courts have since proposed the inclosed Articles. Spain
and France have prepared their Answers. England has not answered yet,3 and no Ministers are yet commissioned or appointed by any Power. If She accepts the
terms, I should not scruple to accept them too, excepting the Armistice and Statu
quo: but I mean I should not insist upon a previous explicit Acknowledgment of the
Sovereignty of the United States, before I went to Vienna. I see nothing inconsistent
with the Character or Dignity of the United States, in their Minister going to Vienna
at the same time4 when Ministers from the other Powers are there, and entering into Treaty with a British
Minister, without any Acknowledgment explicitly of our Independence before the Conclusion
of the Treaty. The very Existence of such a Congress would be of use to our Reputation:
but I cannot yet believe that Britain will wave her Preliminaries. She will still
insist upon the Dissolution of the Treaty, and upon the Return of the Americans under
their Government. This however will do no honor to her Moderation and pacific sentiments,
in the opinion of the Powers of Europe.

Something may grow out of these Negotiations in time; but it will probably be several
Years before any thing can be done. Americans only can quicken these Negotiations
by decisive strokes. No depredations upon their trade, no conquests of their possessions
in the East or West Indies will have any effect upon the English to induce them to
make Peace, while they see they have an Army in the United States, and can flatter
themselves with the hope of conquering or regaining America; because they think that
with America under their Government, they can easily regain whatever they may lose
now in any part of the World.

Whereas the total Expulsion or Captivity of their Forces in the United States would
extinguish their hopes, and persuade them to Peace, sooner than the loss of every
thing else. The belligerent Powers { 420 } and the Neutral Powers may flatter themselves with the hopes of a Restoration of Peace,
but they will all be disappointed, while the English have a Soldier in America. It
is amazing to me that France and Spain do not see it, and direct their forces accordingly.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant.

2. See JA's letter of 13 July to Vergennes, above. The enclosures, however, have not been found with this letter
in the PCC.

3. Unknown to JA, Britain had rejected the Austro-Russian proposals on 15 June. In its response to
the mediation proposals, the British government declared that “on every occasion since
the commencement of the war with France whenever there has been a question of negotiation,
the King has constantly declared that he could never admit in any manner, nor under
any form whatsoever, any interference between foreign powers and his rebellious subjects.”
Moreover, “the King would derogate from his rights of Sovereignty should he in any
wise consent to admit to his Congress any person whatever delegated by his rebellious
subjects, this admission being absolutely incompatible with their quality of subjects.
For this same reason, the conciliatory measures employed to put an end to the rebellion
ought not to be intermixed either in their commencement, or conclusion, with a negotiation
between sovereign states” (PCC, No. 59, II, f. 205–209).

To the Comte de Vergennes

Since my Letter of the thirteenth, upon further Reflection I have thought it necessary
to explain myself a little more particularly in some Points to your Excellency.

If I comprehend the Facts, the British Court first proposed to the Imperial Courts,
a Congress, and a Mediation, upon two Conditions

1. The Dissolution of the Treaties between France and the United States.

2. The Return of the Americans, under the British Government.

In Consequence of this Proposal from St. James's, the two Imperial Courts have made
a Proposition of the Articles, which were Shewn to me, to the Courts of France, Spain
and England, neither of whom, has as yet given an Answer. Their Imperial Majesties
have omitted the two Conditions, which the British Court insisted on, as Preliminaries,
and mean to admit a Representative of the United States to the Congress, to negotiate
Seperately, with the British Minister, { 421 } without ascertaining the Title or Character of the American Representative, untill
the two Pacifications Shall be accomplished.

In my own mind, I am very apprehensive, though I devoutly wish I may be mistaken,
that the British Court in their Answer to the Articles, will adhere to their two Preliminaries.
If they Should there is an End of all Thoughts of a Mediation, or a Congress.1

It is very convenient for the English to hold up to public View, the Idea of Peace:
it serves to relieve their Credit, at certain times, when it is in distress; and to
disconcert the Projects of the neutral Powers, to their disadvantage. It enables their
Friends in the United Provinces to keep the Dutch Nation in that State of Division,
Sloth and Inactivity, from which they derive So much Plunder, with so much Safety:2 and it answers many other of the[ir] Purposes. But I cannot perswade myself, that they will Soberly think of Peace, while
they have any military Force in the United States, and can preserve a Gleam of hope
of conquering, or regaining America. While this hope remains, no depredations on their
Commerce, no loss of Dominion in the East or West Indies, will induce them to make
Peace: because they think, that with America reunited to them, they could easily regain
whatever they may now loose. This opinion of theirs may be extravagant and enthusiastical
and they would not find it easy to recover their Losses: but they certainly entertain
it, and while it continues, I fear they will not make Peace.

Yet, it seems they have negotiated themselves into a delicate Situation. If they Should
obstinately adhere to their two Preliminaries, against the Advice of the two Imperial
Courts, this might Seriously affect their Reputation if they have any, for moderation
and pacifick dispositions, not only in those Courts, but in all the Courts, and Countries
of Europe, and they would not easily answer it to their own Subjects who are weary
of the War.

Peace is so desireable an Object, that Humanity, as well as Policy, demand of every
nation at War, a Serious Attention to every Proposition, which Seems to have a tendency
to it, although there may be grounds to Suspect, that the first Proposer of it, were
not Sincere.

I think that no Power can judge the United States unreasonable, in not agreeing to
the Statu quo, or the Armistice. But, perhaps I have not been Sufficiently explicit,
upon another Point. The Proposal of a Separate Treaty between the British Minister,
and the Representative of the United States, seems to be a benevolent Invention to
avoid Several Difficulties; among others 1. That England may be allowed to Save her
national Pride, by thinking and Saying that the { 422 } Independence of America was agreed to voluntarily, and was not dictated to her by
France, or Spain. 2. To avoid the previous Acknowledgment of American Independance,
and the previous Ascertaining of the Title and Character of the American Representative,
which the Imperial Courts may think would be a Partiality, inconsistent with the Character
of Mediators, and even of Neuters, especially as England has uniformly considered,
any such Step as an Hostility against them, 'tho I know not upon what Law of Nations
or of Reason.

I cannot See, that the United States, would make any Concession, or Submit to any
Indignity, or do any Thing inconsistent with their Character, if their Minister should
appear at Vienna, or elsewhere, with the Ministers of other Powers, and conduct any
negotiation, with a British Minister, without having the Independance of the United
States, or his own Title and Character, acknowledged or ascertained, by any other
Power, except France, untill the Pacification Should be concluded. I dont perceive
that America would loose any Thing by this, any more than by having a Minister in
any Part of Europe, with his Character unacknowledged, by all the Powers of Europe.
In order to remove every Embarrassment therefore as much as possible, if your Excellency
should be of the same opinion and advise me to it, I would withdraw every Objection
to the Congress on the Part of the United States, and decline nothing, but the Statu
quo and the Armistice against which Such Reasons might be given, as I think must convince,
all Men that the United States, are bound to refuse them. If your Excellency Should
think it necessary for me, to assign these Reasons particularly, I will attempt some
of them: but it is Sufficient for me to Say to your Excellency, that my positive Instructions
forbid me, to agree, either to the Armistice or Statu quo.

I have the Honour to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant.

To the President of Congress

John Thaxter wrote this letter during John Adams' absence at Paris. It contains a
full English translation of the memorial that the burgomasters and pensionary of Amsterdam
presented to William V on 8 June. It { 423 } appeared in Dutch newspapers, including the Gazette de Leyde of 17 July. Thaxter also noted that on 6 July the States General had revoked their
order requiring merchant ships to remain in whatever port they found themselves upon
learning of the war with England.

The Comte de Vergennes to John Adams: A Translation

[dateline] Versailles, 18 July 1781

I have received, sir, the letter which you did me the honor to write to me the 13th
of this month. It was owing to the confidence I placed in your judgment and zeal for
your country that I entrusted to you the propositions of the two imperial courts and
requested that you would make such observations as you might think them susceptible
of. Things are not yet sufficiently advanced to admit of communicating them to the
mediating courts. As you have seen in the sketch of our answer, there are preliminaries
to be adjusted with respect to the United States,1 and until they are, you cannot appear and consequently you cannot transact anything
officially with respect to the two mediators. By so doing you would hazard and expose
the dignity of the character with which you are invested.

I have the honor to be very perfectly, sir, your most humble and most obedient servant

[signed] De Vergennes

RC (Adams Papers); endorsed: “M. Le Cte. De Vergennes. 18 July. 1781. recd at five O Clock afternoon
Same day.” LbC (Adams Papers); notation: “This Letter was { 424 } addressed in these Words A monsieur, Monsieur Adams, Agent des Etats Unis de l'Amérique
Septentrionale à l'hotel de valois, rüe de Richelieu a Paris. C. de Vergennes.—all
in the Hand Writing of the Clerk who wrote the Letter. The Letter was signed by the
Comte, de Vergennes.” In 1809 JA published a translation of this letter in the Boston Patriot. There he copied the notation and continued: “Whether the word 'agent' was a blunder
of the clerk, or the art and design of the Comte, is of no consequence now. He knew
I was a minister plenipotentiary, both for peace, and to the states of Holland: but
what reason he had for avoiding to acknowledge it, I know not. It excited some reflections
and suspicions at the time, because it seemed to be conformable to the views of the
mediating courts, which the court of France ought not to have countenanced” (JA, Corr. in the Boston Patriot, p. 122–123).

1. In JA's translation in the Boston Patriot, the passage from the previous comma was italicized.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0317

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: Vergennes, Charles Gravier, Comte de

Date: 1781-07-18

To the Comte de Vergennes

[dateline] Paris July 18. 1781

I have received the Letter, Sir, which you did me the honour to write me of this Days
Date: and I assure your Excellency I never had a Thought of appearing upon the Scaene,
or of taking ministerially or otherwise any Step towards the two mediators. I must
confess to your Excellency, that I have too many Jealousies of the motives, and too
many Apprehensions of the Consequences of this Negotiation, to be willing to take
any Part in it without an express vocation. The English are in such a temper, and
are tottering on such a Precipice, that they will not hesitate at any measure, which
they think can excite every latent Passion and awaken every dormant Interest in Europe,
in order to embroil all the World. Without looking much to Consequences, or weighing
whether the quarrels they wish to excite, will be Serviceable to them or not, they
Seem to think the more Confusion they make, the better, for which reason, my Fears
from the proposed mediation are greater than my hopes.

Nevertheless, if properly called upon, it will be my duty, respectfully to attend
to every Step of it: but there are many questions arising in my mind, upon which,
in due time, I Should wish to know your Excellency's opinion.

The two Imperial Courts, have proposed, that there Should be an American Representative
at the Congress. This is, not merely by implication, but expressly acknowledging,
that there is a belligerent Power in America of Sufficient Importance, to be taken
notice of by them, and the other Powers of Europe. One would think, after this, the
two Imperial Courts, would have communicated their Propositions to Congress. The Propositions,
they have made, and communicated to the Courts of France Spain and England, imply
that America { 425 } is a Power, a free and independent Power, as much as if they had communicated them
also to the Congress, at Philadelphia. Without Such a formal Communication and an
Invitation to the United States in Congress, or to their Representative here, made
by the mediating Courts, I dont perceive how an American minister, can with Strict
Propriety, appear, at the proposed Congress at Vienna, at all. I have never heard
it intimated, that they have transmitted their Propositions to Philadelphia. Certainly
I have received no Instructions from thence, nor have I received any Intimation of
Such Propositions from any minister of either of the mediating Courts, although, as
my mission has been long publick and much talked of, I Suppose it was well known to
both, that there was a Person in Europe, vested by America with Power to make Peace.
It Seems, therefore, that one Step more, might have been taken, perfectly consistent
with the first, and that it may yet be taken, and that it is but reasonable to expect
that it will. How is the American Minister to know, that there is a Congress, and
that it is expected, that he Should repair to it? and that any minister from Great
Britain, will meet him there? Is the British Court, or their Ambassador, to give him
notice? This Seems less probable, than that the mediators Should do it.

The Dignity of North America, does not consist in diplomatick Ceremonials, or any
of the Subtilities of Etiquette: it consists Solely in Reason, Justice, Truth, the
Rights of Man kind, and the Interests of the nations of Europe, all of which well
understood, are clearly in her favour. I shall never, therefore make unnecessary difficulties
on the Score of Etiquette, and Shall never insist upon any Thing of this kind, which
your Excellency, or some other Minister in Alliance does not advise me to, as indispensible.
I Shall go to Vienna, or elsewhere, if your Excellency Shall invite or advise me to
go. But as these Reflections occurred to me, upon the Point of Propriety, I thought
it my duty to mention them to your Excellency.

I have the Honour to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir your most obedient and most
humble Servant

To the Comte de Vergennes

[dateline] Paris July 19. 1781

In my Letter, Sir, of the Eighteenth, I had the Honour to mention Some Things which
lay upon my Mind: but am Still apprehensive { 426 } that in a former Letter, I have not conveyed my full meaning to your Excellency.

In my Letter of the Sixteenth, I Submitted to your Excellencys Opinion and Advice,
whether an American Minister, could appear at the Congress at Vienna, without having
his Character acknowledged, by any Power, more expressly than it is now.

This was Said upon the Supposition, and taking it for granted, that it was the Intention
of the mediating Courts, to admit a Representative of the United States to the Congress,
with Such a commission, and Such a Title as the United States Should think fit to
give him: and that during his whole Residence and negotiations at Vienna, whether
they Should terminate in Peace or not, he Should enjoy all the Prerogatives which
the Law of nations has annexed to the Character, Person, Habitation and Attendants
of Such a minister. It is impossible, that there should be a Treaty at Vienna, between
Great Britain and the People of America, whether they are called United States of1 American Colonies, unless both nations appear there, by Representatives, who must
be authorised by Commissions or full Powers, which must be mutually exchanged and
consequently admitted to be, what upon the Face of them they purport to be.

The Commission, from the United States, for making Peace, which has been in Europe,
almost two Years, is that of a Minister Plenipotentiary, and it authorises him to
treat only with Ministers vested with equal Powers. If he were to appear at Vienna,
he certainly would assume, the Title and Character of a Minister Plenipotentiary and
could enter into no Treaty nor Conference, with any Minister from Great Britain, untill
they had mutually exchanged, authentick Copies of their full Powers. This, it is true,
would be an implied Acknowledgment of his Character and Title, and those of the United
States too: but Such an Acknowledgment, is indispensable, because without it, there
can be no Treaty at all. In Consequence, he would expect to enjoy all the Prerogatives
of that Character, and the moment they Should be refused him, he must quit the Congress,
let the Consequences be, what they might.

And I rely upon it, this is the Intention of the two Imperial Courts: because otherwise,
they would have proposed the Congress, upon the Basis of the two British Preliminaries,
a Rupture of the Treaty, with France, and a Return of the Americans to their Submission
to Great Britain, and because I cannot Suppose it possible, that those Courts, could
believe the Americans capable of Such infinite Baseness, as to appear upon the Stage
of the Universe, to acknowledge themselves { 427 } guilty of Rebellion, and Supplicate for Grace. Nor can I Suppose, that they meant
to fix a Brand of disgrace, upon the Americans, in the Sight of all Nations, or to
pronounce Judgment against them: one, or all of which Suppositions must be made, before
it can be believed that those Courts did not mean to protect the American Minister,
in the Enjoyment of the Priviledges attached to the Character which he must assume.
And because, otherwise, all their Propositions would be to no Effect; for no Congress
at Vienna can make either one or the other of the two proposed Peace's, without the
United States.

But, upon looking over again, the Words of the first Article, there Seems to be room
for dispute, which a British minister, in the present State of his Country, would
be capable of taking Advantage of. The Terms used, Seem to be justly exceptionable.
There are no “American Colonies” at War with Great Britain. The Power at War, is The
United States of America. No American Colonies, have any Representative in Europe,
unless Nova Scotia or Quebeck, or Some of the West India Islands may have an Agent
in London. The Word Colony in its usual Acceptation, implies a Metropolis, a Mother
Country, a Superiour Political Governor, Ideas, which the United States, have long
Since renounced for ever.

I am therefore clear in my own opinion, that a more explicit declaration ought to
be insisted on; and that no American Representative, ought to appear, without an express
assurance, that while the Congress lasts, and in going to it and returning from it,
he shall be considered as a Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States of America,
and entituled to all the Prerogatives of Such a Minister from a Sovereign Power. The
Congress might be to him and his Country but a Snare, unless the Substance of this
is bona fide intended: and if it is intended there can be no Sufficient Reason for
declining to express it, in Words.

If there is a Power upon Earth, that imagines that America, will ever appear, at a
Congress, before a Minister of Great Britain, or any other Power, in the Character
of repenting Subjects, to Solicit or receive an Amnesty or a Warranty of an Amnesty,
that Power, is infinitely deceived. There are few Americans, would hold their Lives
upon Such Terms, and I know of none, who would not rather choose to appear, upon a
Scaffold in their own Country or in Great Britain. All Such odious Ideas ought to
be, forever laid aside by the British Ministry before they propose mediations, or
talk of Peace. The bare mention of them by Great Britain to the United States, would
be { 428 } considered, only as another Repetition of Injury and Insult.2 The Proposal of a Rupture of the Treaty is nothing less to France.

But it is possible, that in the future Course of this negotiation, there may be a
Proposal of a Congress of Ministers, of the Several mediating and belligerent Powers,
exclusive of the United States, to deliberate on the question, in what Character,
the United States are to be considered, and whether a Representative from them can
be admitted, and what Shall be his Title and Priviledges.

All that I can Say, to this Case, at present, is this. The United States have assumed
their equal Station among the nations:3 they have assumed a Sovereignty, which they acknowledge to hold only from God and
their own Swords. They can be represented only as a Sovereign and therefore, although
they might not be able to prevent it, they can never consent that any of these Things
Shall be made questions. To give their Consent, would make the Surrender of their
Sovereignty their own Act. France has acknowledged all these things, and bound her
Honour and Faith to the Support of them, and therefore, although She might not be
able to prevent it, She cannot consent that they should be disputed. Her Consent would
make the Surrender of the American Sovereignty her Act. And what End can it answer
to dispute them, unless it be, to extend the Flames of War? If Great Britain had a
Colour of Reason, for pretending that France's Acknowledgment of American Independance,
was an Hostility against her the United States would have a Stronger Reason to contend
that a denial of their Sovereignty was a declaration of War against them. And as France
is bound to Support their Sovereignty, She would have Reason to Say that a denial
of it, is an Hostility against her, if any Power of Europe has an Inclination to join
England, and make War against France and the United States, there is no need of a
previous Congress to enable her to do it, with more Solemnity, or to furnish her with
plausible Pretexts. But, on the other Hand, if the Powers of Europe are persuaded
of the Justice of the American Pretensions, and think [it the] duty of Humanity4 to endeavour to bring about Peace, they may easily propose that the Character of
the United States shall be acknowledged, and their Minister admitted.

I cannot but persuade myself that the two Imperial Courts, are convinced of the Justice
of the American Cause, of the Stability of the American Sovereignty and of the Propriety
and necessity, of an Acknowledgment of it, by all the Powers of Europe. This I think
may be fairly and conclusively inferred, from the Propositions themselves. Was there
ever an Example of a Congress of the Powers of Europe { 429 } to exhort, to influence, to overawe, the rebellious subjects of any one of them into
Obedience? Is not every Sovereign adequate to the Government, Punishment or Pardon
of its own criminal subjects? Would it not be a Precedent mischievous to Mankind,
and tending to universal Despotism, if a Sovereign, which has been proved to be unequal
to the Reformation or Chastisement of the pretended Crimes of its own Subjects, should
be countenanced in calling in the Aid, of all or any of the other Powers, to assist
him? It is quite Sufficient, that Great Britain has already been permitted to hire
Twenty thousand German Troops for seven Years, and to fill them up yearly by fresh
Recruits, in Addition to her own Force: it is quite Sufficient, that She has been
permitted to corrupt innumerable Tribes of Savages, in Addition to both, to assist
her in propagating her System of Tyranny, and in committing her Butcheries in America,
without being able to succeed. After all this, which is notorious to all Europe, it
is impossible to believe that the Imperial Courts mean to give their Influence, in
any degree, towards bringing America to Submission to Great Britain. It seems to me,
therefore most certain, that the Imperial Courts, perceive that American Independance
must be acknowledged, and if this is so, I think there can be no Objection against
ascertaining the Character of the American Minister, before any Congress meets, So
that he may take his Place in it, as soon as it opens.

But if any Sentiments of Delicacy, Should induce those Courts to think it necessary
to wait, for Great Britain to set the Example of Such Acknowledgment, one should think
it necessary to wait untill that Power Shall discover some Symptoms of an Inclination
that Way. A Congress, in which she should appear and France and the United States
not be represented, would have no tendency to give her Such a disposition, but on
the contrary afford her an Opportunity of forming Parties, blowing up the Coals of
War, and propagating Prejudices and Partial Notions.

I have the Honour to be, with the greatest Respect, your Excellencys most obedient
and most humble servant

[signed] John Adams

RC (Arch. Aff. Etr., Paris, Corr. Pol., E.-U., vol. 17:427–428); endorsed: “M. de R.” LbC (Adams Papers); text completely canceled. Dft (Adams Papers); notation by CFA: “Draught of letter to the Count de Vergennes.” LbC (Adams Papers); notation: “Sent by my servant J. Stephens 21. July. to Versailles.” The three Adams Papers documents are listed in the order in which they presumably were written. They have
been used to confirm or correct doubtful readings in the recipient's copy. Note, however,
that JA made additional changes in the recipient's copy.

3. A direct reference to the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. JA used the same words, for much the same purpose, in his memorial of 19 April to the States General, above.

4. In both the draft and the second Letterbook copy, the text from the previous comma
to this point reads “and think it their duty to Humanity.”

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0319

Author: Jenings, Edmund

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-07-19

From Edmund Jenings

[dateline] Amsterdam July. 19. 1781

[salute] Sir

I think your Excellency will not be Surprized to find that I am stil at Amsterdam.1 Mr. Dana is so well Accompanied on his Route, that it was quite Unnecessary any one
Else should attend him; and the Difficulties daily arising in the Dispatch of the
South Carolina take from me any certainty of leaving this Place yet awhile. Tis true
we are told that she will go on such a day and such a day. But Most have hitherto
been deceivd so much, that they are sick of talking of it. The Comdor. is now at the
Texel to see to the Loading of another Ship taken up by Messrs. De Neufville. This
is supposed will be done in four or five days and then—

I am Happy to hear your Excellency is in good Health and Good Spirits at Paris. We
have had news here from Lorient, which I suppose your Excellency has heard, Relative
to our Affairs in S. Carolina, that rejoices every one.2 We have been in a Bustle for 3 or four Days [On Account?] of the Emperors Visit his Behaviour was as usual Condescending to all, and therefore
he has gaind the Admiration of all. It is said He had a long Conversation with Mr.
<Randolph> Rendorp who is quite content with what passed between them. His disposition towards
England being sounded He said, He could by no means take part with the Ennemies of
his Friends—Mr. Le Roy told me yesterday, that He is well assured, that He expressed
a Desire to see your Excellency.3 There seems to have been but one Man here who committed a Sottise4 towards Him. It was a Broker, who having an Obligation on that Part of Silesia, that
was conquered and is now possessd by the King of Prussia, presented it to Him for
payment. He mildly said He must apply to his prussian Majesty. Others report that
He told the Man that it required three or four hundred thousand men to recover the
sum demanded.

They talk of some resolutions that Frieseland has come to, which are very interesting.
Among them are a recomendation of entering into Engagements with France and Acknowledging
the Independancy of America.5

2. The news from Lorient has not been identified. However, the Gazette de Leyde of 24 July reported actions by forces under Nathanael Greene, Francis Marion, and
others against British detachments in North and South Carolina at Camden, Ninety Six,
Hobkirks Hill, and Fort Watson. While these were not all victories, their cumulative
effect was to drive the British from the interior of the Carolinas (Middlekauff, Glorious Cause, p. 488–490).

3. Joseph II visited Amsterdam 12–15 July. On the day of his departure he met for a half
hour with Joachim Rendorp, burgomaster of Amsterdam at l'Hotel d Ville (Gazette de Leyde, 20 July). For another account of the Emperor's purported desire to see JA, see JA's letter of 3 Aug. to the president of Congress, below.

To the President of Congress

John Thaxter wrote this letter during John Adams' absence at Paris. It contains an
English translation of an article appearing in Dutch newspapers, including the Gazette de Leyde of 20 July. The article reported that the quarter of Westergo and a portion of that
of Sevenwoude, two of the four chambers forming the States of Friesland, had protested
against a plurality in the provincial states in support of the Duke of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel.
In a letter of 24 July (Adams Papers), the last written by Thaxter to Congress before John Adams' return from Paris, he
referred again to events in Friesland and explained that the States of Friesland,
“which strangers often confound with West Friesland, or North Holland,” was composed
of four chambers or quarters: Oostergo of eleven districts; Westergo of 9 districts;
Sevenwoude of 10 districts; and a fourth chamber composed of the deputies from the
province's eleven cities.

To the Comte de Vergennes

Since my Letter of the nineteenth, Sir, another Point has occurred to me, upon which
it seems necessary, that I Should Say Something to your Excellency, before my Departure
for Holland, which will be on Monday Morning.2

An Idea has, I perceive been suggested, of the several States of { 432 } America, choosing Agents seperately, to attend the Congress, at Vienna, in order to
make Peace, with Great Britain, so that there would be thirteen instead of one.3

The Constitution or Confederation of the United States, which has been Solemnly adopted
and ratified by each of them Seperately and by all of them jointly has been officially
and authentically notified to their Majesties the Kings of France and Spain, and to
their High Mightinesses, the States General of the United Provinces of the Low Countries,
and communicated to all the other Courts and Nations of the World, as far as the Gazettes
of Europe are able to Spread it: So that it is now as well and universally known as
any Constitution of Government in Europe.

By this Constitution, all Power and Authority, of negotiating with foreign Powers
is expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.4 It would therefore be a publick Disrespect and Contempt offered, to the Constitution
of the Nation if any Power Should make any Application, whatever, to the Governors,
or Legislatures of the Separate States. In this respect the American Constitution
is very different from the Batavian.

If the two Imperial Courts Should address their Articles to the States Seperately
No Governor or President of any one of those Commonwealths, could even communicate
it to the Legislature. No President of a Senate could lay it, before the Body, over
which he presides. No Speaker of an House of Representatives could read it to the
House.

It would be an Error, and a Misdemeanour, in any of these officers, to receive and
communicate any Such Letter. All that he could do would be, after breaking the Seal
and reading it, to Send it back. He could not, even, legally transmit it to Congress.
If Such an Application, therefore, Should be made and Sent back, it would consume,
much time to no Purpose, and perhaps have other worse Effects.

There is no method for the Courts of Europe, to convey any Thing to the People of
America but through the Congress of the United States, nor any Way of negotiating
with them, but by means of that Body. I must therefore intreat your Excellency, that
the Idea of Summoning Ministers from the thirteen States may not be countenanced at
all.

I know very well, that if each State, had in the Confederation, reserved to itself
a right of negotiating with foreign Powers, and Such an Application Should have been
made to them, Seperately upon this { 433 } occasion, they would all of them Seperately refer it to Congress, because the People
universally know, and are well agreed, that all Connections with foreign Countries,
must, in their Circumstances, be under one Direction. But all these Things, were very
maturely considered in framing the Confederation, by which, the People of each State,
have taken away from themselves, even the right of deliberating and debating upon
these Affairs, unless they should be referred to them by Congress for their Advice,
or unless they should think proper to instruct their Delegates in Congress, of their
own Accord.

This matter may not appear to your Excellency, in so important a Light as it does
to me: and the Thought of such an Application to the United states may not have been
seriously entertained: but, as it has been mentioned, though only in a Way of transient
Speculation, I thought I could not excuse myself from Saying Something upon it, because
I knew it would be considered in so unfavourable a Light, in America, that I am persuaded
Congress would think them selves bound to remonstrate against it, in the most Solemn
manner.

I have the Honour to be, with the greatest Respect, sir your most obedient and most
humble Servant

1. In 1809, when he published this letter in the Boston Patriot, JA preceded it with the following explanation of his motives for writing his final letter
to Vergennes. “I lived in daily and hourly hopes and expectation of an answer to some
of my letters and communications, or of an invitation to some personal conference,
in which I might be favored with some intimations of his excellency's sentiments of
approbation, or disaprobation, or his advice, criticisms or corrections of any thing
he might think required any alteration. But nothing appeared. All was total silence
and impenetrable mystery. Such a dead reserve, such a fixed determination not to commit
himself to any thing; not even to an acknowledgment of the obligations of his own
treaty with the United States, appeared to me to be poor encouragement to us, to be
over communicative with the French ministry. I waited till the twenty first of the
month, when, being very anxious to return to Holland, where I had reason to believe
I could negociate for peace with Great Britain, much more rapidly than in France,
I wrote the following letter” (JA, Corr. in the Boston Patriot, p. 130).

3. It is not known how JA learned of this proposal. He received full confirmation of it several months later
via Francis Dana in St. Petersburg. Dana provided copies of letters he had received
from the Marquis de Verac dated 2 and 12 Sept. regarding the general peace conference
(LbC's in French, Adams Papers; English translations, Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:684–685, 705–707).

Count Panin, Catherine II's chancellor, first posed the idea of inviting American
state delegates during preliminary discussions concerning a Russian mediation of the
Anglo-French war in 1780. Prince Kaunitz, the Austrian chancellor, raised the plan
again in April 1781 in talks with the French ambassador at Vienna concerning the Austro-Russian
mediation. Both men believed that Britain was more likely to negotiate with the individual
states than with Congress because it would have the opportunity to split the rebellious
colonies and retain a portion of its American empire. Moreover, this plan would allow
Britain to avoid { 434 } recognizing the U.S. as sovereign and independent.

Vergennes favored the proposal. In a memorandum to Louis XVI of Feb. 1781, the foreign
minister reasoned that the only means to end the war might be for the U.S. to accept
a long truce based on uti posseditis. France would guarantee American independence during the term of the truce, but if
Britain negotiated with the separate states the likely effect would be the partition
of the U.S.

Whether due to JA's forthright representations or to the improving military situation in the U.S.,
Vergennes' reply to the mediators in August rejected their intervention principally
because of uncertainty over the status of Congress' negotiator at any peace conference
(De Madariaga, Armed Neutrality of 1780, p. 245, 328; Morris, Peacemakers, p. 169–171, 179– 183, 208–210).

In 1809, when he published this letter in the Boston Patriot, JA credited his letters to Vergennes for the defeat of the mediation. There he wrote:
“The answer to the articles relative to America, proposed by the two imperial courts,
and the letters to the Comte de Vergennes, ... I have the satisfaction to believe,
defeated the profound and magnificent project of a Congress at Vienna, for the purpose
of chicaning the United States out of their independence.

“It moreover established the principle, that American Ministers Plenipotentiary were not to appear without their public titles
and characters, nor to negociate but with their equals after an exchange of full powers” (JA, Corr. in the Boston Patriot, p. 133).

From the Committee for Foreign Affairs

[dateline] Philada. July 21st. 1781

[salute] Sir

I do not find by President Huntington's Letter Book that he has forwarded the within
Resolve of July 12th. respecting your Powers of Sept. 29th. 1779 therefore I take
the Opportunity of two Vessels which are to sail in a few Hours, to communicate it
doubly.

[salute] Your humble Servant

[signed] James Lovell for the Comte. of for. Affrs.

private

The whole of the Proceedings here in regard to your two Commissions, are I think,
||Ill judged but|| I persuade myself no ||dishonour was for you int||ended, the Business greatly in every view ||chagrins me||. This you will have learnt from my former Letters written in an half light.1

By her own Account your Lady was well June 30th.2 Your last to us is of Oct. 24.3

Enclosure: A Resolution on a Treaty of Commerce

[dateline] July 12. 1781

By the United states in Congress assembled

Resolved That the commission and instructions for negotiating a treaty of Commerce
between these United states and Great Britain given to the honorable John Adams on
the twenty ninth day of Sep• { 435 } tember one thousand seven hundred and seventy nine be and they are hereby revoked.1

Extract from the minutes

[signed] Cha Thomson secy.

The content of all or some notes that appeared on this page in the printed volume
has been moved to the end of the preceding document.

1. See JCC, 20:746–747. The resolution to revoke JA's commission to negotiate an Anglo-American commercial treaty proceeded directly
from Congress' revision of the peace ultimata in its instructions of 15 June to the
expanded peace commission. Under the new instructions a western border on the Mississippi
River was no longer the sine qua non for any Anglo-American peace treaty, while the preservation of Newfoundland fishing
rights remained a requirement for the Anglo-American commercial treaty. For the new
peace instructions, their relationship to the resolution of 12 July, and Congress'
effort to resolve the resulting sectional conflict, see Commissions and Instructions
for Mediation and Peace, 15 June, No. III, and note 9, above. Regarding Congress' 12 July resolution, JA would write to the president of Congress on 5 Feb. 1783 that he had never received
any “explanation of the motives to it, or the reasons on which it was founded” (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 6:242–247).

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0323

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: Franklin, Benjamin

Date: 1781-08-01

To Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Amsterdam August 1st. 1781

[salute] Sir

Upon my Arrival here I found your Letter of the 30th. of June. Copy of which had been
sent along to me by Mr. Thaxter to Paris, but by some unaccountable means sent back
without being delivered to me.

Many Bills had been presented in my Absence, and at first I was at a loss whether
to accept them, until further Advice from You. But considering they had lain here
near a Month, and that detaining them longer unaccepted would occasion some disagreable
Speculation here, and observing by your Letter, that the stopping of the Specie in
Holland was the Condition upon which You meant to pay them, I have ventured to accept
them all. Inclosed is a List of all the Bills hitherto accepted since the former list
transmitted to You.1

Inclosed is also another Number of the Politique Hollandais.

The Ship is not yet sailed, but We are now told She is to sail in a few days, which
at least I hope will prove true.2

I have the Honor to be, your Excellency's most obedient humble Servant.

[signed] J. Adams

RC in John Thaxter's hand (PPAmP: Franklin Papers); endorsed: “J. Adams. Augt 1. 1781.” On the page containing the
endorsement is a series of calculations.

1. Neither the enclosed list of bills nor the copy of Le politique hollandais mentioned in the following paragraph has been found. The previous list of bills that
JA accepted and sent { 436 } to Franklin was dated 14 June (LbC, Adams Papers). On 17 July Fizeaux, Grand & Co. wrote to present 43 bills totaling 35,726 florins (Adams Papers).

2. In a letter of 7 Aug. to Jean de Neufville & Fils, William Jackson wrote that Como.
Alexander Gillon had weighed anchor that morning, crossed the shoals, and was at sea
off the Texel (PCC, Misc. Papers, Reel No. 4, f. 517– 518). Gillon had gone to sea, at least in part, to avoid his
creditors and was anchored outside the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts (Louis F.
Middlebrook, The Frigate South Carolina: A Famous Revolutionary War Ship, Salem, Mass., 1929, p. 4–5). The South Carolina apparently sailed for America on or about 12 Aug., for which see William Jackson's
letter of that date, below.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0324

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-03

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 3d. 1781

[salute] Sir

I have the honor to inclose Copies of some Papers which passed between the Comte de
Vergennes and me, lately at Paris.1 The Conjecture, that the British Court would insist upon their two Preliminaries,
is become more probable by the publication of the King's Speech at the Prorogation
of Parliament.2

“The Zeal and Ardor which You have shewn for the Honor of my Crown,” says the King;
“your firm and steady support of a just Cause, and the great efforts You have made
to enable me to surmount all the difficulties of this extensive and complicated War,
must convince the World, that the ancient Spirit of the British Nation is not abated
or diminished.”

“While I lament the continuance of the present Troubles, and the Extension of the
War, I have the conscious satisfaction to reflect that the constant aim of all my
Councils has been to bring back my deluded subjects in America to the happiness and
liberty they formerly enjoyed, and to see the tranquility of Europe restored.”

“To defend the dominions, and to maintain the rights of this Country, was on my part
the sole Cause and is the Object of the War. Peace is the earnest wish of my heart;
but I have too firm a Reliance on the spirit and resources of the Nation; the powerful
Assistance of my Parliament, and the Protection of a just and all ruling Providence, to accept it upon any other terms or conditions than such as may consist with the
honor and dignity of my crown, and the permanent interest and security of my people.”

We all know very well what his meaning is, when he mentions “the honor and dignity
of his crown, and the permanent interest and security of his people.” Could the Minister,
who composed this Speech, expect, that anybody would believe him when he said, that
the constant Aim of all his Councils had been to bring back the Americans to the happiness
and liberty they formerly enjoyed?

The whole of this Speech is in a Strain, which leaves no room to doubt that the Cabinet
of St. James's is yet resolved to persevere in the War to the last Extremity, and
to insist still upon the Return of America to british Obedience, and upon the rupture
of the Treaty with France, as Preliminaries to the Congress at Vienna. Thus the two
Imperial Courts will find themselves trifled with by the British. It is not to be
supposed that either will be the voluntary bubble of such trickish Policy. The Empress
of Russia is supposed to be as sagacious as She is spirited: yet She seems to have
given some attention to the pacific professions of the English. If She should see
herself intentionally decieved, She will not probably be very patient. The Emperor,
in his late Journey through Holland, made himself the Object of the Esteem and Admiration
of all: affable and familiar, as a great Sovereign can ever allow himself to be with
dignity, he gave to many Persons unequivocal Intimations of his sentiments upon public
affairs. Patriotism seemed to be the object, which he wished to distinguish. Whoever
espoused with zeal the honor and interest of his own Country, was sure of some mark
of his Approbation: whoever appeared to countenance another Country in preference
to his own, found some symptom of his dislike: even the Ladies French or Dutch, who
had any of the English Modes in their Dress recieved from his Majesty some Intimation
of his disapprobation of their taste. Every body here, since his departure, is confident
of his entire detestation of the principles on which the English have conducted this
War, and of his determination to take no part in it, in their favor. His Sentiments
concerning America are inferred [from] a very singular Anecdote, which is so well attested, that it may not be improper
to mention to Congress.

His Majesty condescended in a certain Company to enquire after the Minister of the
United States of America to their high Mightinesses—said he was acquainted with his
Name and Character, and should be glad to see him: a Lady in Company asked his Majesty
if he would drink Tea with him at her House? He replied in the affirmative in the
Character of the Comte of Falkenstein.3 A Lady in Company undertook to form the Party: but upon Enquiry, the American was
at Paris. It is supposed with good reason that there could be nothing personal in
this Curiosity, and therefore that it was intended as a political signification of
a certain degree of complaisance towards America.

Thus it is, that the Words, Gestures and Countenances of Sovereigns are watched, and
political Inferences drawn from them: but { 438 } there is too much Uncertainty in this Science, to depend much upon it. It seems however
that the Emperor made himself so popular here, as to excite some appearance of Jealousy
in Prussia.

For my own part, I think that the greatest political stroke, which the two Imperial
Courts could make, would be, upon recieving the answer from England adhering to their
Preliminaries, immediately to declare the United States independent. It would be to
their immortal honor: it would be in the Character of each of these extraordinary
Genius's: it would be a blessing to Mankind: it would even be friendship to England.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient humble
Servant.

[signed] John Adams

RC in John Thaxter's hand (PCC, No. 84, III, f. 343–346); endorsed: “Letter Aug 3. 1781 Amsterdam J Adams Read Oct
3. Britain will probably insist on her two Preliminaries Conduct of the Emperor of
Germany while in Holland.” LbC (Adams Papers). The RC is damaged at one point and the missing word supplied from the Letterbook.

1. Enclosures not found. Presumably JA enclosed copies of his complete correspondence with Vergennes in July.

2. JA's source for George III's speech of 18 July was likely an English newspaper; he provides
a virtually verbatim transcription of the 3d, 8th, and 9th paragraphs of the speech
as it appeared in the London Chronicle of 17–19 July.

3. The pseudonym Joseph II used when traveling or acting incognito (Gazette de Leyde, 13 July). A meeting between JA and Count Falkenstein would have had no official implication, particularly with regard
to Austrian recognition of the U.S. as independent and sovereign.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0325

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-04

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 4. 1781

[salute] Sir

I should Scarcely be credited, if I were to describe the present State of this Country.
There is more Animosity against one another, than against the common Ennemy. They
can agree upon nothing. Neither upon War, nor Peace: neither upon acknowledging the
Independency of America, nor upon denying it. Hopes of a general Peace, which flatter
all Parties, are continually kept up by Tales and Artifices, which are too gross to
impose upon any Man who has the free Use of his Reason. There is yet as much fear
of provoking England, as if she was their Freind, or their Protector.

The naval force of England, is held in check, by her other Ennemies in Such a manner,
that the Ships of the Republick, would be able to do a great deal, if they were employed:
but they do nothing: and there is as little done, by Individuals in Privateering,
as by the national Marine.

They however, or Somebody for them do their full Share with the other Powers of War
in writing Paragraphs in the Gazettes, in which their Forces and Efforts are exagerated.

It will be three or four Years, according to every present Appearance before this
nation will get warm enough to do any Thing, and therefore Americans, I think have
no ground at all to expect any Kind of Assistance or Encouragement from hence. The
Dutch Officers would fight, if they had opportunity: and the English are not without
Apprehensions from them, So that probably they will think themselves obliged to keep
more of their Forces at home, than they would if the Dutch were not in the War. This
is all the Advantage, that We shall derive.

I have taken some Pains to discover the true Motives and Causes of that Aversion,
which prevails, against acknowledging American Independence,—to consider it, in the
Strongest Light, even as the English themselves consider it, it is but an Hostility
against an open Ennemy. The English themselves are laughing at them for their Blindness
and Timidity, in not doing it. The immediate Advantages from it, in Trade, War, and
Policy are obvious: The Disadvantages, no Man can see <, but a Dutchman>.

I never could get any other Answer to my Questions Why dont you acknowledge America?
What Reasons have you against it? What are you afraid of? What harm could it do you?
than this. We are Small and weak. We have no desire to do a brillant Action. We ought
to avoid coming to Extremities with England, as long as possible. We ought not to
provoke England. England must See, and know that she can never prevail in America,
and therefore, if We were to provoke her, She will withdraw her Fleets and Armies
from thence, fall upon this Republick and tear it to Pieces. This is So weak, that
it is impossible, they should be in Earnest. There must be Some other View. None of
them will avow it: but I take the Secret to be, they think they may be brought low
by the English, and in such Case they might be able to purchase Peace by the Sacrifice
of America. In this they are deceived again: but if they were not, there is a baseness
of Soul in it that would disgrace Shylock the Jew. Thanks be to God it is <neither> not in <the> their Power <of Jews or Dutchmen> to Sacrifice America.

In Short the Nation has no Confidence left in its own Wisdom, Courage, Virtue or Power.
It has no Esteem nor Passion, nor desire for either. It loves and Seeks Wealth and
that alone. The depravation of the human heart, is more Striking and Shocking in this
nation { 440 } than it is, in France, or even England, because there is preserved more of an external
show of Regularity, Morals and Religion which adds the odium of Hypocrisy, to that
of Profligacy, and Corruption. Before I came to this Country I hoped it was not so
bad as Some others: but I have learned enough to convince me, that although external
Appearances differ somewhat, the Corruption of the Heart, and the debasement of the
Understanding is very nearly equal in all the nations of Europe, and therefore that
America can never be too much upon her Guard against them all.

To the President of Congress

In this letter, which was read in Congress on 16 Nov., John Adams provided an English
translation of a report dated 13 July at St. Petersburg. Taken from the Gazette d'Utrecht of 6 Aug., it disclosed that the Russian government had instructed its minister in
London to join with the Swedish and Danish ministers in representations concerning
Britain's declaration of war against the Netherlands. The report also indicated that
the British minister at St. Petersburg had received his government's answer to the
preliminary articles proposed for the Austro-Russian mediation, but that its contents
remained unknown. The same report appeared in the Gazette de Leyde of 10 August. Adams indicated that one need only look to experience and George III's
speech on 18 July to know the likely nature of Britain's response. He then declared:
“Thus all Europe is to be bubbled by a species of Chicanery, that has been the derision
of America for a Number of Years. In time the Courts of Europe will learn the nature
of these british tricks by Experience, and receive them with the Contempt or the Indignation
they deserve.”

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 6th. 1781

[salute] Sir

In several of the London Newspapers of July 26th. appeared the following paragraph.

“An order has been sent from Lord Hillsborough's Office for bringing Curson and Governieur,
whom We sometime ago mentioned to have been confined by Command of Sir George Rodney
and General Vaughan for having carried on a traiterous Correspondence with the Enemy
at St. Eustatia, to Town to be confined in Newgate to take their Trial for the Crime
of High Treason. The whole Circumstances { 441 } of their Case and all their Correspondence has been submitted to the Inspection of
the Attorney and Solicitor General, and they consider the Offence in so serious a
light, that a direct refusal has been given to a Petition from Mr. Curson to be indulged
with the priviledge of giving Bail for Appearance on account of the ill health which
he has experienced on board the Vengeance, where he and his Colleague have been for
some Months confined, and which is now lying at Spithead. It has been discovered from
an Inspection of their Papers, that Mr. Adams, the celebrated Negotiator to Holland,
was the Man, with whom they held their illicit Correspondence, and it is said that
the Appearance of Proof against them, has turned out much stronger, than was originally
supposed.”1

Last Fall Mr. Searle informed me, that Messieurs Curson and Governieur were Continental
Agents at Statia, and advised me to send my Dispatches to their Care, as worthy Men,
a part of whose Duty it was to forward such things to Congress. I accordingly sent
several packets of Letters, Newspapers and Pamphlets to their Address, accompanied
only with a Line simply requesting their Attention to forward them by the first safe
Opportunity.2 I never saw those Gentlemen, or recieved a Line from either. It must have been Imprudence,
or Negligence, to suffer my Letters to fall into the hands of the Enemy. I have looked
over all the Letters, which I wrote about that time, and I find no Expression in any
that could do Harm to the Public if printed in the Gazettes; yet there are some things
which the English would not choose to publish I fancy. What other Correspondences
of Messieurs Curson and Governieur might have been discovered I know not.

The British Ministry seem to be growing outrageous. The more they dispair, the more
angry they are. They think not at all of Peace. America should think of it as little:
sighing, longing for Peace, will not obtain it. No Terms short of eternal disgrace
and irrecoverable ruin would be accepted. We must brace up our Laws, and our military
Discipline, and renounce that devoted and abandoned Nation forever. America must put
an End to a foolish and disgraceful Correspondence and Intercourse, which some have
indulged, but at which all ought to blush as inconsistent with the Character of Man.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant.

1. For an example of this report, see the London Courant of 26 July. With regard to Curson and Gouverneur, the same newspaper noted on 2 Aug.
that “To pervert the meaning { 442 } of any statute, is to destroy it. . . . if they were English subjects, it was unjust
to seize their property along with the other inhabitants; if they were Dutch, and
the seizure of their property was a legal measure, the detaining and imprisoning them,
on a charge of high treason, for corresponding with the American Congress, or the
French, is the most arbitrary stretch of the law that can be imagined—much as we have
been used of late years to perversion and misinterpretation.”

2. On 23 Oct. 1780, JA wrote a first and second lettertwo letters to the firm presumably covering identical packets going by different vessels (both
LbC's, Adams Papers). JA indicated that the packets contained dispatches for Congress, but the specific letters
enclosed have not been identified. In a letter of 1 Sept. (Adams Papers), Curson & Gouverneur reported that they forwarded the packets. No other correspondence
between JA and the firm has been found.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0328

Author: Franklin, Benjamin

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-08-06

From Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Passy, Augt. 6. 1781

[salute] Sir

I some time since gave Orders as you desired to Mr. Grand, to furnish you with a Credit
in Holland for the Remainder of your Salary to November next. But I am now told that
your Account having been mixt with Mr. Dana's, he finds it difficult to know the Sum
due to you. Be pleased therefore to State your Account for two Years, giving Credit
for the Sums you have receiv'd, that an Order may be made for the Ballance.

Upon this Occasion it is right to acquaint you that I do not think we can depend on
receiving any more money here applicable to the Support of the Congress Ministers.
What Aids are hereafter granted, will probably be transmitted by the Government directly
to America. It will therefore be proper to inform Congress, that Care may be taken
to furnish their Servants by Remittances from thence.1

I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient and most humble Servant

[signed] B Franklin

RC (Adams Papers); notation: “I have only Time to transmit to Congress, this Copy, for their Consideration,
it requires no Comments from their most obedient Servant J. Adams. Amsterdam Aug.
15. 1781.” This note, in JA's hand, also appears on a copy of Franklin's letter in John Thaxter's hand (PCC, No. 84, III, f. 355–356); endorsed: “from Docr Franklin to Mr Adams 6th Augt 1781.”

1. On 5 March 1782 the secretary for foreign affairs, Robert R. Livingston, wrote JA that he had submitted Franklin's letter to Congress (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 5:219–222). There is no indication as to what specific action, if any, Congress
took on 12 Nov. regarding Franklin's letter. But on 2 Jan. 1782, Congress ordered
Livingston to provide it with the estimated expenses of its ministers and their secretaries.
At the same time, it instructed the superintendent of finance to supply the ministers
and secretaries with their salaries. Under the schedule submitted at that time, JA's salary was £2,500. His secretary, when one should be appointed, would receive £500
(JCC, 22:1–2).

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0329

Author: Grand, Henry

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-08-06

From Henry Grand

[dateline] Paris August 6th. 1781

[salute] Sir

After due Consideration we agreed upon sending your two trunks of Books, by land,
which I have had executed, having first had them plumbed,1 by which means all Visitation is prevented. I have consigned them à la Veuve Desmeth
à Anvers who will send them on to Fizeaux Grand & ce. pursuant to your desires, you
have here inclosed the Note of my charges thereto, for which I place 34
10 to your Debit.

I suppose you put order yourself while at Paris, to some other Commands you had wrote
me about formarly concerning some trunks of Cloaths &c., at all events I am at your
Service.

With regard to your Account, you were hardly gone but I went and applyd to Dr. Franklin
to urge him to a settlement concerning your Appointments, he then gave me an order
in your favour for two years Salaries from Novr. 1779 to Novemb. 1781. amounting to
120,000, enjoining me to deduct out of said Sum what Money had been paid you and already
charged to the Publick. Carefull of your Interets I represented to the Doctor, that
out of the former orders he had given you, and that I had charged to the Publick,
you had had some part of it, carried to Mr. Dana's account and which I thought it
was proper to replace in yours, as Mr. Dana enjoyd a Separate Salary at that time
of a £1000 [str.]2 Upon this Consideration the Doctor desired me to write you, in order to give in an
account shewing what Sums you have had carried from your Account to Mr. Dana's; to
spare you part of that Trouble I inclose you a State of those Transactions which I
have extracted from my Books, and also another of what Sums Mr. Dana has had transferr'd
from his Account to yours, the whole for your Consideration.3

I also inclose a fresh State of your account currant, and by means of all these Documents
I hope you will soon put me in the way of stating your Finances in a regular way as
I do ambition to get your Excellency's approbation in my Quality of Director General
of your Finances.

You'll be pleased to lett me Know whether we do agree in point of the Ballance due
to me of

From John Bondfield

[dateline] Bordeaux 7 August 1781

[salute] Sir

We have many American Vessels arrivd within these five or six days past most of them
belonging to No. Carolina but last from the West Indies, the situation of the Army's
preventing their return and will detain them in a foreign Trade til a change takes
place, the latest advices we have by them are of May consiquently them at hand Via
London are later and more circumstial.

Our letters from Spain advice the Fleet left Cadiz the 20th. the Men of War stood
to the Westward and the Transports under Convoy of two Ships and some frigates enterd
the Streight,1 some letters mention the Station of the Combind Fleets off Lisbon to Intercept all
Outward bound Fleets destind to India, the West Indies, or the Southern States we
shall in a Post or two be certain at any rate they have little to apprehend from Darby2 whose force included the Ships destind for New York under Digby makes together only
28 sail who were left the 28 of last month in the Channel.3

We have a singular report from Spain of England having ceeded Minorca to Russia to
prevent the execution the present Spanish Expedition from Cadiz is intended against
that Island.4

Two American privateers Cruising in the Bay of Biscay discoverd a Cutter whose superior
sailing put it out of their power to take her to decoy her they engaged each other
the one under English the other under American Colours the Cutter bore down to take
part with the supposed English privateer came under her Quarter so soon as out of
the power of the Cutter to escape each Privateer bore round her and obliged her to
strike she proved a Packet from Rodney with dispatchs which the officer destroyd we
shall be informd on Thursday of the perticulars they have been able to colect from
the Officers on board. The Cutter is carried into Bilboa.

On advice of the Loss of the Marquis de la fayett I wrote Doct. Franklin offering
a considerable supply of Cloathing which should { 445 } have been on this on board the Ships bound for the United States I have not been honor'd
with an Answer had my offers been Accepted we have ready for Sea conveyences direct
on Moderate Terms.5

1. On 18 Aug. the fleet landed 14,000 Spanish and French troops at Minorca. The 2,700
man British garrison withstood a siege until 5 Feb. 1782, when disease forced its
surrender (Mackesy, War for America, p. 397, 438).

2. The combined fleet sailed on 23 July to cover the expedition to Minorca. It remained
at sea only until 5 Sept. and took no action against Darby's outnumbered Channel fleet
(same, p. 397; James, British Navy in Adversity, p. 307).

3. The strength of Darby's fleet given by Bondfield is approximately correct. It sailed
from Spithead near the end of July to protect incoming West Indian convoys. For part
of its voyage the fleet was accompanied by three ships of the line under the command
of Adm. Digby, Adm. Arbuthnot's successor as commander in chief in American waters.
When Darby learned that the Franco-Spanish fleet was at sea, he abandoned his mission
and by 25 Aug. was at Torbay preparing to defend the Channel (Mackesy, War for America, p. 397; James, British Navy in Adversity, p. 306).

4. During the Hussey-Cumberland negotiations in 1780, Spain called for the cession of
Gibraltar and Minorca in return for Oran and Mers el Kébir on the Barbary Coast, but
Britain summarily rejected the proposal. In early 1781 Britain offered Minorca to
Russia as a means to forestall Russian intervention in the Anglo-Dutch war, rather
than to counter a Spanish attack on the island (Morris, Peacemakers, p. 54; Mackesy, War for America, p. 383–384).

5. Neither Bondfield's letter to Benjamin Franklin nor any reply by Franklin has been
found. See Bondfield's letter of 11 July to the Committee for Foreign Affairs (PCC, No. 92, f. 451–454).

To the President of Congress

This People must have their own Way. They proceed like no other. There cannot be a
more striking Example of this, than the Instructions given to Privateers and Letters
of Mark.

The Commander is ordered to bring his Prizes into some Port of the United Provinces,
or into the Ports or Roads of the Allies and Friends of this Republick, especially
France, Sweeden, North America, or Spain: and the Ship shall be at liberty to join,
under a written Convention, with one or more Privateers or other similar Ships of
War, belonging to Hollanders, Zealanders, French, Americans or Spanish, to undertake
jointly any thing advantageous &c.

This is not only an Acknowledgment of the Independence of North America, but it is
avowing it to be an Ally and Friend. But I suppose, in order to elude and evade, it
would be said that these are only the { 446 } Instructions given by Owners to their Commanders: yet these Instructions are required
to be sworn to, and produced to the Admiralty for their Approbation.

It is certain that the King of Spain, when he declared War against Great Britain,
sent orders to all his Officers to treat the Americans as the best Friends of Spain,
and the King's Pleasure, being a Law to his Subjects, they are bound by it.

But what is there to oblige a Citizen of the United Provinces to consider the Americans
as the Friends of the Republick? There is no such Law, and these Instructions cannot
bind. Yet it is very certain, that no Dutchman will venture to take an American.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant,

1. In a letter of 9 Aug. from Jean de Neufville & Fils to the president of Congress,
the firm reported that JA was shown the admiralty instructions given to two privateers that they had freighted
to America. JA observed that the instructions were “an Acknowledgement of Independance of America;
the admiralty by their Avowd instructions mentioning in particular, France America
and Spain, as our allies and friends” (PCC, No. 145, f. 76). The two privateers were the Liberty and the Aurora, for which see JA's letter of 22 Nov. to Benjamin Franklin (Franklin, Papers, 36:95– 96).

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0332

Author: Jenings, Edmund

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-08-11

From Edmund Jenings

[dateline] Brussels Augst. 11. 1781

[salute] Sir

On my return to this Town I found a Letter from London informing me that the 20£ was
paid according to order.1 The Gentleman, who executed this Commission is named Bridgen and his address is Bridgen
& Waller London, putting a little, b thus under the Seal, which prevents his Partner opening the Letter. He sent me the
inclosed Copies of an Ode.2 I find in his letter the following Paragraph: “I hear that the new chariot, which
your Nephew has just stept into, is in the highest stile. I Hope He wont drive too
fast, least a wheel should fly off but that is his Business.” I fancy this alludes
to A Lee, who I suppose has gained the Post, for which He was a Candidate.3

I do not Know whether your Excellency has read a little Work, called the Pou Francois.
It is a sad libel on the Old Gentleman at Passy and others. I have no doubt that it
is written by Tickel the Author of the Cassette Verte and Anticipation.4 We have reports here of an Engagement between the Dutch and English fleets, but nothing
distinctively.5

I did myself the Honor of sending to your Excellency two Books { 447 } published 5 or 6 years ago on public Happiness the Gentleman promised to deliver them
safely.6

I find Mr. Lee7 a great deal Better. He desires his Respects to your Excellency.

3. Arthur Lee was Jenings' second cousin. On 17 Jan. Lee was nominated to be secretary
for foreign affairs, the post to which Robert R. Livingston was elected on 10 Aug.
(JCC, 19:65; 21:851–852).

4. JA received a copy of [Delauney], Histoire d'un pou françois; ou, l'espion d'une nouvelle espéce, tant en France, qu'en
Angleterre. Contenant les portraits de personnages intéressans dans ces deux royaumes
et donnant la clef des principaux evènemens de l'an 1779, et de ceux qui doivent arriver
en 1780, 4th edn., Paris [i.e. London], 1779, the previous fall (vol. 10:296–297). For JA's opinion of the pamphlet, see his reply to Jenings of 18 Aug., below. The work may have been attributed to Richard Tickell because, like Tickell's
La Cassette Verte de Monsieur de Sartine, Trouvée chez Mademoiselle Du Thé, The Hague [i.e. London], 1779, its title was in black and red and it was sold by T. Becket of the Strand,
London (T. R. Adams, American Controversy, p. 624–625, 678). Tickell's most celebrated work was his parody, Anticipation: Containing the Substance of His M---y's Most Gracious Speech to both
H---s of P---l---t, on the Opening of the approaching Session, together With a full
and authentic Account of the Debate which will take Place in the H---e of C---s, on
the Motion for the Address, and the Amendment, London, 1778. See L. H. Butterfield, Anticipation by Richard Tickell. Reprinted from the First Edition, London, 1778 With
an Introduction, Notes and a Bibliography of Tickell's Writings, N.Y., 1942.

5. For the Battle of the Dogger Bank fought on 5 Aug., see JA's letter of 18 Aug. to the president of Congress, below.

6. A copy of François Jean, Marquis de Chastellux, An Essay on Public Happiness, 2 vols., London, 1774, is in JA's library at the Boston Public Library (Catalogue of JA's Library).

From Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Passy Augt. 12. 1780 [i.e. 1781]

[salute] Sir

Since my last of the 6th. Instant there have been several Arrivals in France from
America. I have Letters from Philda. of the 20th. June, tho' none from Congress. The
Advices are, that General Green has taken all the Enemy's Out Posts in So. Carolina
and Georgia, and that their Possession in those Provinces is reduc'd to Charlestown
and Savannah. In North Carolina they also have Wilmington. Their Great Force is now
under Cornwallis in Virginia, where they are ravaging and burning as usual, M. de
la Fayette not being in force to repress them: But Genl. Wayne was on his March to
reinforce him, and had passed Annapolis.

I have received the Letter from your Excellency inclosing a List of the Bills you
have lately accepted.1 I think you did right in accepting { 448 } them, and hope they are the last that the Congress will draw, 'till they know you
have Funds to pay them.

I have the honour to be, with Respect, Sir, Your Excellency's Most obedient and most
humble Servant

From William Jackson

[dateline] On board the South Carolina Augt. 12 1781

[salute] Sir

Could I have supposed that Your Excellency would have returned to Amsterdam before
the Ship sailed, I should certainly have done myself the honor and agreeable satisfaction
of waiting upon you before I left this Country—but this pleasure is denied me—and
I am scarce allowed time by Mr. Thaxter's immediate departure to bid Your Excellency
farewell in this abrupt manner1—but I lean with confidence upon a hope that your candor will consider it as the imposition
of necessity, not the result of inclination—for, if I may be permitted the expression,
my regard and esteem for your private worth and personal character, is not exceeded
by my respect for the deserving representative of my Country—I beg that your Excellency
will be persuaded of my most perfect attachment—that you would at all times honor
me with a proof of that confidence in laying your commands upon me in America, which
I will gratefully and chearfully execute—and would you admit my correspondence, I
will seize every occasion to communicate whatever transaction may occur in the military
line worthy your attention.

I most sincerely wish you every happiness, which in an absence from your family and
Country you can enjoy—to which I likewise wish you an early, happy, and honorable
return—with every good wish—I am, most respectfully, and sincerely, Your Excellency's
obliged and obedt. Servant.

1. John Thaxter presumably brought CA on board the frigate to be entrusted to Jackson's care for the voyage to America.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0335

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: Grand, Ferdinand

Date: 1781-08-15

To Ferdinand Grand

[dateline] Amsterdam August 15. 1781

[salute] Sir

Your Letter of May 14. with your Account inclosed I received: I { 449 } | view have also received your Letter of August the 6th., with the Account inclosed in that.1

I will endeavour to explain, myself, as well as I can upon the Several Things mentioned
in them.

In the first Account you have given me Credit for 24000
and charged me with 2/7 of it upon my order to Credit Mr. Dana. This Amounts to the
Same Thing as if you had credited me with 5/7 of the 24000
and charged me with nothing credited to Mr. Dana. So that I have no Objection to this
matter.

The Article of the 22 of January of 2658:16:10, which Mr. Dana desired you to pay
me—it is no more than this. Mr. Dana desired me to lend him that sum, when he was
here, and going to Paris, to bear his Expences, which I did, <by giving him an order of the House of Fizeaux & Grand>, when he arrived at Paris he desired you to pay me. So that this Article stands right
in your Account. There has been no other Connection between Mr. Dana and me, in Money
Matters.

Inclosed is an Account currant, which, I pray you to examine and, finish, if you please
as soon as convenient by adding, what you have paid or may pay Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams's
Account I presume is right. The Wine, I left you will allow me, just what you please
for.

I must further beg you to pay Mr. Chavagne, Thirty One Livres four Sous for, a Box
of Newspapers he sent me and charge it to my Account.2

2. Presumably De Chavannes de La Giraudiere, who wrote to JA on 25 July (Adams Papers) to bemoan the fact that when he called at the Hôtel de Valois JA had already departed and to note that he was sending some newspapers and books. He
wrote again on 23 Sept. that he had not yet been paid and was in need of funds because of the illness of
his son (Adams Papers). La Giraudiere wrote once again on 20 Oct. and there confessed that he had presented duplicate “mandats,” or orders for payment,
to Grand and that both had been paid. He regretted his actions, which were due only
to his desperate situation, and awaited JA's judgment on the matter (Adams Papers).

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0336

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-16

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 16th. 1781

[salute] Sir

Mr. Temple has held offices of such Importance, and a Rank so considerable in America,
before the Revolution, that his Return to his native Country at this time, cannot
fail to cause much Speculation, and it is to be feared some diversity of sentiments
concerning him. As he came from London to Amsterdam and did me the honor of a visit,
in which he opened to me his design of returning, and his { 450 } sentiments upon many public affairs, it will be expected in America by many, although
it is has not been requested by Mr. Temple; that I should say something concerning
him.

I was never before personally acquainted with this Gentleman, but I have long known
his public Character and private Reputation. He was ever reputed a Man of very delicate
sentiments of Honor, of Integrity and of Attachment to his native Country, although
his Education, his long Residences in England, his numerous Connections there, and
the high offices he held under the British Government did not ever admit of a general
opinion, that his sentiments were in all respects perfectly conformable to those of
the most popular Party in the Colonies. Nevertheless he was never suspected to my
Knowledge of concurring in or countenancing any of those many Plots which were laid
by other Officers of the Crown against our Liberties, but on the contrary was known
to be the object of their Jealousy, Revenge and Malice because he would not. He was
however intimate with several Gentlemen who stood foremost in opposition, particularly
Mr. Otis, who has often communicated to me Intelligence of very great Importance which
he had from Mr. Temple, and which he certainly could have got no other Way, as early
I believe as 1763 and 1764 and onwards.

I cannot undertake to vindicate Mr. Temple's Policy in remaining so long in England:
but it will be easily in his power to shew, what kind of Company he has kept there:
what kind of Sentiments and Conversation he has maintained, and in what Occupations
he has employed his time.

It is not with a View to recommend Mr. Temple to Honors or Emoluments, that I write
this. It would not be proper for me, and Congress know very well, that I have not
ventured upon this practice, even in Cases, where I have much more personal knowledge
than in this. But it is barely to prevent, as far as my poor opinion may go, Jealousies
and Alarms upon Mr. Temple's Arrival. Many may suspect that he comes with secret and
bad designs, in the Confidence of the British Ministry, of which I dont believe him
capable.

Mr. Temple, it is most certain, has fallen from high Rank and ample Emoluments, merely
because he would not join in hostile designs against his Country. This I think should
at least entitle him to the quiet Enjoyment of the Liberties of his Country and to
the Esteem of his fellow Citizens, provided there are no just grounds of suspicion
of him. And I really think it a Testimony due to Truth to say, that after a great
deal of the very freest Conversation with him, I see no { 451 } | view { 452 } Reason to suspect his Intentions. I have taken the Liberty to give Mr. Temple my
own sentiments concerning the suspicions which have been and are entertained concerning
him, and the Causes of them, and of all parts of his Conduct which have come to my
knowledge with so little disguise, that he will be well apprized of the disappointments
he may meet with, if any. I hope however, that he will meet a more friendly Reception
in America, and better prospects of an happy Life there than I have been able to assure
him.

Whether any services or sufferings of Mr. Temple could support any Claim upon the
Justice, Gratitude or Generosity of the United States, or of that of Massachusetts
in particular, is a Question, upon which it would be altogether improper for me to
give any opinion, as I know not the facts so well as they may be made known, and as
I am no Judge, if I knew the facts. But this I know, that whenever the facts shall
be laid before either the Great Council of the United States or that of the Massachusetts,
they will be judged of by the worthy Representatives of a just, grateful and generous
People, and therefore Mr. Temple will have no Reason to complain if the decision should
be against him.1

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant.

1. It is unknown when Temple met with JA. In an undated note JA agreed to meet with Temple at six o'clock. Immediately below JA's signature, Temple wrote “Mr. Adams Invited Mr. Temple to pass a second day with
him, without the Company of any other person, but Mr. T happened to be engaged, but
sent him word that he would come at 6, and chat with him till 11 oClock, which he
did” (MHi: Winthrop Papers).

John Temple was a Boston native, James Bowdoin's son-in-law, and a former customs
official. In 1773 he moved to England, but in 1778 and 1779 visited the U.S. in pursuit
of a peace settlement based on reconciliation. His actions then, coupled with the
Crown offices he had held previously, raised questions as to whether he truly supported
the U.S. cause. He was, however, equally at odds with the ministerial forces in England
and had been vilified in the London press for his support of the U.S. (vol. 10:418). The tone of JA's letter indicates that he, like Cotton Tufts in 1782, thought that any “Toryism”
Temple displayed was nothing more serious than “Don Quixotism” (Adams Family Correspondance, 4:386–387).

Temple was at the center of controversy immediately upon his arrival at Boston in
late October. The Mass. Council closely examined him and in 1782 he engaged in a “paper
war” with James Sullivan that probably owed as much to the rivalry between John Hancock
and James Bowdoin as to issues concerning Temple's loyalty. Congress resolved on 27
Feb. 1782 that JA's letter should not influence the Mass. Council's determination as to whether Temple
constituted a threat to the U.S. In late 1783, Temple and his family returned to England.
In 1785 he took up residence at New York as the British consul general (same, 4:240, 242, 386–387; 5:271; 6:80–81; JCC, 22:101–102). For Samuel Adams' comments on Temple's arrival, particularly as it
effected the relations between Hancock and Bowdoin, see his second letter to JA of 18 Dec., Writings of Samuel Adams, ed. Harry Alonzo Cushing, 4 vols., N.Y., 1904–1908, 4:267–268.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0337

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-16

To the President of Congress

This letter, read in Congress on 12 Nov., contains an English translation of a “verbal
insinuation” to the Dutch minister at St. Petersburg, proposing to settle the Anglo-Dutch
war at a general peace conference at Vienna. For the text of the translation, see
John Adams' letter to Benjamin Franklin, 25 Aug., below. Adams did not believe that Russia, in making the offer, had shared the proposed
articles for the negotiations with the Dutch minister. He concluded “I must confess,
I like this Insinuation very much, because it may be in time an excellent Precedent
for making such an Insinuation to the Minister of the United States of America.”

Commission to Conclude a Tripartite Alliance with France and the Netherlands

[salute] The United States in Congress Assembled To all who shall see these Presents send Greeting,

Whereas a union of the force of the several powers engaged in the War against Great
Britain may have a happy tendency to bring the said War to a speedy and favourable
issue, and it being the desire of these United States to form an Alliance between
them and the United Provinces of the Netherlands.

Know Ye therefore that We confiding in the integrity prudence and ability of the honorable
John Adams have nominated, constituted and appointed and by these presents do nominate,
constitute and appoint him the said John Adams, our minister Plenipotentiary, giving
him full powers general and special to Act in that quality, to confer, treat agree
and conclude with the Person or Persons vested with equal powers by his most Christian
Majesty and their High Mightinesses the States General of the United Provinces of
the Netherlands,2 of and concerning a treaty of Alliance between his most Christian Majesty, the United
Provinces of the Netherlands, and the United States of America, and whatever shall
be so agreed and concluded, for us and in our name to Sign and thereupon to make such
treaty, Conventions and agreements as he shall judge conformable to the ends we have
in view; hereby promising in good faith that We will accept ratify and execute whatever
shall be agreed, concluded and { 454 } signed by him our said Minister. In Witness whereof We have caused these presents
to be signed by our President and sealed with his Seal.

Done at Philadelphia this Sixteenth day of August in the Year of our Lord one thousand
Seven hundred and Eighty One and in the Sixth Year of our Independence By The United
States in Congress Assembled

Instructions to Conclude a Tripartite Alliance with France and the Netherlands

The report of the Committee on the communications of the honble. the Minister Plenipotentiary
of France was taken into consideration,2 and thereupon—

Resolved, That the Minister Plenipotentiary of these United States at the Court of
Versailles, be directed to inform his most Christian Majesty that the tender of his
endeavours to accomplish a coalition between the United Provinces of the Netherlands,
and these States, hath been received by Congress, as a fresh Proof of his solicitude
for their interests: that previous to the communication of this, his most christian
Majesty's friendly purpose, Congress impressed with the importance of such a connection
had confided to Mr. John Adams full powers to enter, on the part of the United States,
into a treaty of Amity and Commerce with the United Provinces, with a special instruction
to conform himself therein to the treaties subsisting between his most Christian Majesty
and the United States;3 that Congress do, with pleasure, accept his most Christian Majesty's interposition,
and will transmit further powers to their Minister at the Hague, to form a treaty
of Alliance; between his Most Christian Majesty, the United Provinces, and the United
States, having for its object, and limited in its duration to, the present war with
Great { 455 } Britain; that he will be enjoined to confer on all occasions, in the most confidential
manner, with his most Christian Majesty's Minister at the Hague; and that Provisional
authority will also be sent, to admit his Catholic Majesty, as a party.

Resolved, That the Minister plenipotentiary of these United States at the Hague, be,
and he is hereby instructed to propose a treaty of Alliance, between his most christian
Majesty, the United Provinces of the Netherlands, and the United States of America,
having for its object, and limited in its duration to, the present war with Great
Britain,4 and conformed to the treaties subsisting between his most Christian Majesty, and
the United States.

That the indispensible conditions of the Alliance be, that their High Mightinesses,
the States General of the United Provinces of the Netherlands, shall expressly recognize
the Sovereignty and Independence of the United States of America, absolute and unlimited,
as well in matters of Government as of Commerce: That the War with Great Britain shall
be made a common Cause, each party exerting itself according to its discretion in
the most effectual hostility against the common Enemy; And that no party shall conclude
either truce or peace with Great Britain without the formal consent of the whole first
obtained, nor lay down their arms until the Sovereignty and Independence of these
United States shall be formally, or tacitly assured by Great Britain in a treaty which
shall terminate the War.

That the said Minister be, and he hereby is farther instructed to unite the two Republics
by no Stipulations of Offence, nor Guarantee any possession of the United Provinces:
To inform himself, from the minister of these United States at the Court of Spain,
of the progress of his negotiations at the said Court; and if an Alliance shall have
been entered into, between his Catholic Majesty and these United States, to invite
his Catholic Majesty into the Alliance herein intended; if no such Alliance shall
have been formed, to receive his Catholic Majesty, should he manifest a disposition
to become a party to the Alliance herein intended, according to the Instructions given
to the said Minister at the Court of Spain.

That in all other matters not repugnant to these instructions, the said Minister at
the Hague do use his best discretion.

Resolved, That the Minister Plenipotentiary of these United States at the Hague, be,
and hereby is instructed to confer in the most confidential manner, with his most
Christian Majesty's Minister there.5

Ordered That the foregoing resolutions be communicated to our { 456 } Ministers at the Courts of Versailles and Madrid, that they may furnish every information,
and aid in their power, to our Minister at the Hague in the Accomplishment of this
business.

1. For the dispatch of these instructions and their arrival, see JA's commission, 16 Aug., note 1, above.

2. On 20 July the Chevalier de La Luzerne requested the appointment of a congressional
committee to confer with him about the Anglo-Dutch war and the establishment of a
Dutch-American alliance. The Committee reported on 23 July that the French minister
indicated that the state of Anglo-Dutch affairs “presented a favourable opportunity
for a union of the two republicks” and “that Congress ought not to neglect to send
to Holland a prudent and able man, with full powers.” By 13 Aug. the committee had
prepared draft instructions that, unlike those adopted on 16 Aug., provided for a
bilateral treaty (JCC, 20:769; 21:778–780, 859). There is no record of any further discussions with La
Luzerne. Art. 10 of the 1778 Franco-American Treaty of Alliance, however, permitted
France and the United States to “invite or admit other Powers who may have received
injuries from England to make common cause with them, and to accede to the present
alliance under such conditions as shall be freely agreed to and settled between all
the Parties” (Miller, ed., Treaties, 2:39). JA had long believed that Art. 10 could serve as the best means to widen the recognition
of the United States as independent and sovereign, and further isolate Great Britain.

3. For JA's commission and instructions of 29 Dec. 1780 respecting a treaty of amity and commerce
with the Netherlands, see vol. 10:447–449.

4. The limitation of the alliance to the duration of the war and the refusal to guarantee
Dutch possessions mentioned two paragraphs below were the principal differences from
the Franco-American alliance. The Franco-American Treaty of Alliance was a perpetual,
defensive alliance against British aggression and Arts. 11 and 12 established the
basis for a mutual guarantee of possessions (Miller, ed., Treaties, 2:39–40).

From Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Passy Augt. 16 1781

[salute] Sir

I have the honour to inform your Excellency that I yesterday received Dispatches from
Congress, refusing for the present, the Dismission I had requested, and ordering me
upon an Additional Service, that of being join'd with yourself and Messrs. Jay, H.
Lawrence and T. Jefferson, in Negociations for Peace.1 I would send you a Copy of the Commission, and of another which authorizes us to
accept of the Mediation of the Emperor, and the Empress of Russia, but that I suppose
you may have them in the enclosed Packet. I shall be glad to learn from your Excellency
what Steps have already been taken in this important Business.2

With great Regard, I have the honour to be, Sir, Your Excellency's most obedient and
most humble Servant

1. For Franklin's attempted resignation, see his letter of 19 May, and note 3, above. The commissions and instructions of 15 June for the joint peace commission
were sent to JA under cover of a letter of 20 June from the president of Congress, all above.

To Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Amsterdam August 17. 1781

[salute] Sir

The Day before Yesterday, were brought to my House, Fifty one Bills of Exchange, amounting
to 40958 B.f. all drawn on the 22 June 1781 at Six months Sight, on the Honble. Henry
Laurens Esqr. in favour of Mr. John Ross.

This is a Phaenomenon which none but you Philosophers can explain, at least I can
think of but one Hypothesis, which might account for it. It is, that they had <Settled it in their Minds> received Information that I had gone to Vienna to make Peace; had made it, and thereby
obtained Mr. Laurens's Liberty, and his Removal to Holland, and gone over to the Court
of St. James's myself to be presented to the King of G. Britain. Say! do I reason
like one of the initiated? I am glad they made this discovery, because by this means,
I am almost out of the Scrape, and should have been wholly So, had not an unlucky
Letter from Mr. Ross been produced, Copy of which is inclosed, in which Mr. Ross desires
Messrs. Larwood Van Hasselt and Van Suchtelen “to present them for Acceptance to the
Honble. John Adams Esqr. Representative at present from the United States at your
Place, or to any of the Agents employed by him” &c.1

Probably this may be, in Payment of the Debt to Mr. Morris and Mr. Ross which you
found due to them upon Settlement. However all conjecture are fruitless, as I have
no Letter of Advice, or any Intimation concerning them. The Bills are drawn by Mr.
Hopkinson and countersignd by Mr. Smith, like former ones, are indorsed by Mr. Ross,
and have all the appearances of Genuineness.

Messrs. Larwood & Co. have agreed to wait, untill I could write to your Excellency,
to know whether you could pay them, and whether you would choose that I, or any other
should accept them. If you cannot pay them they must be protested, for my Loan is
exactly in the State it was, when I had the Honour to give your Excellency an Account
of it at Paris. And although the Dutch have beat the English,2 they dont yet venture to lend Money to America. I have the Honour to be

1. The letter from John Ross has not been found. Ross became embroiled with the U.S.
Commissioners in 1778 over payment for supplies procured on their behalf. He returned
to the U.S. in 1780 to settle his accounts and pressed Congress for payment. On 20
June, Congress ordered Robert Morris to make a partial payment in bills of exchange;
that is, in bills drawn on Henry Laurens and John Jay. The Congress did so in accordance
with Morris' advice that “it is not necessary to wait for the absolute knowledge of
funds being specially appropriated for payment of them in Spain and Holland.” In a
diary entry for 23 June, Morris indicated that he issued Ross an order on the loan
officer for the bills, which were apparently dated 22 June (vol. 6:28, 80, 379; vol. 7:16–17, 85–86, 119–121, 186; JCC, 20:680–682; Morris, Papers, 1:168, 169). See also Franklin's reply of 31 Aug., and note 1, below.

2. For the Battle of the Dogger Bank, see JA's letter of 18 Aug. to the president of Congress, below.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0342

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: Bondfield, John

Date: 1781-08-18

To John Bondfield

[dateline] Amsterdam Aug 18 1781

[salute] Sir

I have received your favour of August 7. with much pleasure, and thank you for the
agreable News it contains. The Dutch have at last, Sent off Parker with a Flea in
his Ear1—pardon a very homely Expression. There is an End, sir, from this Moment of British
Tyranny upon the Sea. The Heart and Spirit of the English Navy is certainly broke,
and their Skill and Courage gone. They have lost their Courage in finding that the
other maritime Powers have equal skill with themselves.

Pray Sir, am I not in your Debt—pray send your Account to Mr. Grand without a Moments
loss of Time and draw upon him for Your Money.2 I am about settling Accounts with him and wish to have your Account included in it.

1. For the Battle of the Dogger Bank, see JA's letter of 18 Aug. to the president of Congress, below.

2. Bondfield apparently sent his account directly to JA, for in a letter of 12 Oct. (LbC, Adams Papers), JA informed Ferdinand Grand that Bondfield was owed £390 12s.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0343

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-18

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 18th. 1781

[salute] Sir

We have recieved at last Parkers Account of the Action with Admiral Zoutman: according
to which, the Battle was maintained with a continual fire for three Hours and forty
Minutes, when it became impossible to work his Ships.1 He made an Attempt to recommence the Action, but found it impracticable. The Bienfaisant
had lost his { 459 } | view Main-Top-Mast, and the Buffalo her Mizzen Yard, and the other Vessels were not less
damaged in their Masts, Rigging and Sails. The Enemy did not appear in a better Condition.
The two Squadrons remained some time over against each other; at length the Dutch
retired, taking with their Convoy the Course to the Texel. He was not in a Condition
to follow them. The Officers, and all aboard, behaved with great Bravery: and the
Enemy did not discover less Courage. He incloses the particulars of the killed and
wounded, and of the Damages, which the Vessels have sustained. The last is prudently
suppressed by the Ministry.—List of the killed and wounded in the Action of the 5th.
of August.

1. At dawn on 5 Aug. Vice Adm. Sir Hyde Parker's squadron with a merchant fleet from
the Baltic sighted Rear Adm. Johan Arnold Zoutman's squadron, also with a merchant
fleet, outbound from the Texel. The resulting Battle of the Dogger Bank was conducted
at half-musket shot and resulted in extraordinary casualties for the number of vessels
engaged. They exceeded, for example, those in the 1778 battle off Ushant in which
thirty ships of the line fought on each side. The Dutch proved that they could fight
the British navy on equal terms. The battle did much for their morale and was hailed
as a victory. The action, however, left the status quo unchanged and was a British
victory in the sense that { 460 } Parker's convoy went on to England, while Zoutman's put back into port (Mackesy, War for America, p. 395; Mahan, Navies in the War of Amer. Independence, p. 189–194). The account given here by JA is from a French translation of Parker's report of 6 Aug. that appeared in Dutch
newspapers, including the Gazette de Leyde of 21 August. See also the report in the English newspapers, such as the London Chronicle of 9–11 August.

2. It is unclear where JA got his casualty figures. While the listing of British casualties agrees with official
sources, that for the Dutch is incomplete and understates their losses. The figures
accepted by most authorities, and which appeared in the Gazette de Leyde of 21 Aug., put the Dutch losses at 142 killed and 403 wounded for a total of 545.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0344

Author: Adams, Abigail

Recipient: Jenings, Edmund

Date: 1781-08-18

To Edmund Jenings

[dateline] Amsterdam Aug. 18. 1781

[salute] Dr. Sir

I have received your favour of 11. will take measures to repay the 20£. The ode is
very fine. I shall be happy if the News is confirmed, that your Nephew has Succeeded.
But have no News from America.

The Pou, I read, nine months ago with Contempt and Disgust. I would not have gone
through it, if it had not been merely to know that I had read it, as I think it a
Duty to read every Thing which relates to America.

An Engagement there has been, in the old Style. A good Hint this to our Ennemies.
It would bring them to reason, if they were what they are not, rational Creatures.1 Parkers own Account is enough to shew that the Dutch did their Duty: But will not
Parker be shot, for not doing his?

The Empress of Russia has invited their High mightinesses to the Congress qui doit
etre a Vienne.2 But what Says the King of England?

I thank you Sir for the Books on publick Happiness, which I received safe, but have
not Seen the Gentleman. Have not yet received the Books from Ostend. My Regards to
Mr. Lee.3

1. In both the recipient's and Letterbook copies the remainder of the paragraph is interlined.
For the Battle of the Doggerbank, see JA's letter of 18 Aug. to the president of Congress, note 1, above.

2. See JA's letter of 16 Aug. to the president of Congress, calendared above.

3. In the Letterbook this paragraph is followed by one that JA canceled: “I feel that there is not a motion made by an American upon the Continent
but what is immediately known in London, among certain Circles, and bandied about
in Such a manner, that the Ministry know it, as well as they. There is not a paragraph,
which is inserted in the London courant, but what is directly told from what quarter
it comes. Your Name and your Neighbours, are mentioned.” The editors have been unable
to find any reference in the London Courant to Jenings or his associates in Brussels, including William Lee and Alice DeLancey
Izard.

4. It was very unusual for JA to sign a letter with a pseudonym; AA was Edward Bridgen's designation for JA in his letter of 13 July, descriptive note, above.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0345

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-22

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 22d. 1781

[salute] Sir

The Constitution of this Country is such, that it is difficult to discover the general
Sense. There have been all along Circumstances in which it might be discerned; but
these were so feeble, and so susceptible of Contradiction and Disguise, that some
extraordinary Exertions were necessary to strike out unquestionable proofs of the
Temper and Opinion of the Nation. Last Spring, the Part of this People, which was
most averse to War, was for making Propositions and Concessions to England in order
to obtain Peace: This Policy was not only injudicious but would have been fruitless,
because the English would have made Peace upon no other Terms, than this Nation's
joining them against France, Spain and America, which would have been its Ruin. Nevertheless,
if the Party had prevailed, and sent Ambassadors to London to solicit Peace, the Court
of London would have found so many Arts and Pretences for spinning out the Negotiation,
and would have obstructed the Commerce of Holland so much, as to bring on a discouragement
and dispair among the People. In these critical Circumstances, something uncommon
was necessary to arouse the Nation, and bring forth the public Voice. The first Step
of this kind was the Proposition of the United States of America to their high Mightinesses,
which being taken ad referendum became a subject of deliberation in every City of
the Republick, and the publication of the Memorial of the nineteenth of April 1781,
which made the American Cause the primary Object and main spring of the War, the Topick
of Conversation in every private Circle, as well as in every public Assembly. This
Memorial gave all Parties an Opportunity to know with Certainty the public opinion:
and accordingly such a general and decided approbation was discovered every where,
that the few who detested it in their hearts never dared to open their Mouths. Emboldened
by this Mr. Vanberkel came forward with his Application to the States for a vindication
of his Character, and altho' he has not obtained an Answer, yet it has been discovered
that his Enemies have not been powerful enough either to condemn nor to censure him.1 Not long after followed the manly Proposition of the Regency of Amsterdam, for an
Enquiry into the Causes of the Inactivity of the State, and in Course their direct
Attack upon the Duke of Brunswick.2

The American Memorial has not obtained, and probably will not { 462 } obtain for a long time; an acknowledgment of American Independence, but it discovered
with absolute Certainty the Sentiments of the Nation. Mr. Vanberkel's Petition has
not procured him a formal Justification, but it has proved that his Enemies are too
weak to punish or to censure him. The Proposition of Amsterdam has not obtained an
Enquiry into the Causes of the Sloth of the State, nor the Appointment of a Committee
to assist the Prince: but it has occasioned an universal Declaration of the People's
Sentiments, that the State has been too inactive, and the Councils of the Court too
slow. The Application of Amsterdam against the Duke has not procured his Removal,
but it has procured an universal Avowal, that the public Councils have been defective;
and an universal Cry for an Alteration, and has obliged the Court to adopt a different
System.

When the public Councils of a Country have taken a wrong bias, the public Voice, pronounced
with Energy, will sometimes correct the Error, without any violent Remedies. The Voice
of the People, which had been so often declared by the late sea Action, was found
to be so clear, that it has produced many remarkable effects. Among which none deserve
more Attention, than the following Declarations of the Prince. The first was inserted
by order in the Newspapers in these words.

“As Pains are taken to draw the Public into an Opinion, that the Vessels of the Meuse
(Rotterdam) and of Middlebourg (Zealand), which at first had Orders to join the Squadron
of the Texel, (only those of Amsterdam) had afterwards recieved counter orders, as
it is given out in some Cities almost in so many Words, and which is propagated (God
knows with what design), it is to Us a particular Satisfaction to be able to assure
the Public, after authentic Information, and even from the supream Authority, that
such Assertions are destitute of all foundation, and absolutely contrary to the Truth:
that the orders given and never revoked, but on the contrary repeated more than once
to the Vessels of the Meuse, to join the Convoy of the Texel, could not be executed,
because it did not please Providence to grant a Wind and the other favorable Circumstances
necessary to this effect, while the Province of Zealand, threatened at the same time
with an Attack from an English Squadron, would not willingly have seen diminished
the Number of Vessels, which lay at that time in their Road. It is nevertheless much
to be regretted, that Circumstances have not permitted Us to render the Dutch Squadron
sufficiently strong, to have obtained over the Enemy a Victory as useful, as it was
glorious.”3

On the 14th. of August the Prince wrote the following Letter to the Crews of the Vessels
of the State.

“Noble, respectable and virtuous, our faithful and well-beloved.

We have learned with the greatest Satisfaction, that the Squadron of the State, under
the Command of Rear Admiral Zoutman, altho' weaker by a great deal in Ships, Guns
and Men, than the English Squadron of Vice Admiral Parker,4 has resisted so courageously, on the fifth of this month, his Attack: that the English
Squadron, after a most obstinate Combat, which lasted from eight o Clock in the morning
to half after Eleven, has been obliged to desist and to retire. The Heroic Courage,
with which Vice Admiral Zoutman, the Captains, Officers, petty Officers, and common
Sailors and Soldiers, who have had a part in the Action, and who under the blessing
of God Almighty have so well discharged their duty in this naval Combat, merit the
praises of all, and our particular approbation: it is for this Cause, We have thought
fit, by the present, to write to You, to thank publickly in our name the said Vice
Admiral, Captains, Officers, petty Officers and common sailors and soldiers, by reading
this Letter on board of each ship which took part in the Action, and whose Captains
and Crews have fought with so much Courage and Valour, and to transmit by the Secretary
of the fleet of the State an authentic Copy, as well to the said Rear Admiral Zoutman,
as to the Commanders of the Ships under his Orders, of the Conduct of whom the said
Rear Admiral had reason to be satisfied: testifying, moreover, that We doubt not,
that they and all the other Officers of the State and Soldiers, in those Occasions
which may present, will give proofs that the State is not destitute of Defenders of
our dear Country, and of her Liberty, and that the ancient heroic Valour of the Batavians
still exists, and will not be extinguished: Whereupon, Noble, Respectable, Virtuous,
ever faithful and well beloved, We recommend You to the divine Protection.” Your affectionate
Friend

Thus altho' the Enemies of England in this Republick do not appear to have carried
any particular point against the opposite Party, yet it appears that they have forced
into Execution their System, by means of the national Voice, and against all the Measures
of the Anglomanes. The national Spirit is now very high: so high that it will be dangerous
to resist it. In time all things must give way to it. This { 464 } will make a fine diversion, at least for America and her Allies. I hope in time, We
may derive other Advantages from it: but We must wait with Patience here, as We are
still obliged to do in Spain, and as We were obliged to do in France, where We waited
Years before We succeeded.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant

1. For the results of Engelbert François van Berckel's appeal, see Dumas' letter of [12 Jan]., and note 8, above.

2. For Amsterdam's address of 18 May protesting the nation's unpreparedness and its memorial
of early June calling for the removal of the Duke of Brunswick, see JA's letters to the president of Congress of 24 May (calendared) and 26 June (first letter), both above.

3. The French text of this announcement appeared in the Gazette de Leyde of 17 August.

4. In fact, Zoutman's squadron had a slight advantage, being composed of eight ships
of the line with 460 guns as opposed to Parker's squadron of seven ships of the line
and 446 guns (Mackesy, War for America, p. 395).

5. The French text of this letter appeared in the Gazette de Leyde of 21 August.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0346

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: President of Congress

Recipient: McKean, Thomas

Date: 1781-08-22

To the President of Congress

[dateline] Amsterdam August 22d. 1781

[salute] Sir

The late glorious Victory, obtained by Admiral Zoutman over Admiral Parker, is wholly
to be ascribed to the Exertions of Amsterdam.

Pretences and Excuses would have been devised, for avoiding to send out the Fleet,
and indeed for avoiding an Action, when at Sea, if it had not been for the Measures
which have been taken to arouse the Attention and animate the Zeal of the Nation.
The Officers and Men of the Army, and especially of the Navy appear to have been as
much affected and influenced by the proceedings of the Regency of Amsterdam, as any
other parts of the Community. Notwithstanding the apparent ill success of the Enterprizes
of the great City, it is certain that a flame of Patriotism and of Valour has been
inkindled by them, which has already produced great effects, and will probably much
greater.

It is highly probable however that if the Regency of Amsterdam had taken another Course,
they would have succeeded better. If instead of a Complaint of Sloth in the executive
department, and a personal Attack upon the Duke, they had taken the Lead in a System
of public measures, they would have found more zealous Supporters, fewer powerful
Opposers,1 and perhaps would have seen the Ardor of the Nation increase with equal Rapidity.
For Example, as the { 465 } Sovereignty of the United States was a Question legally before them, they might have
made a Proposition in the States of Holland to acknowledge it, and make a Treaty with
them. This Measure would have met with general Applause among the People throughout
the seven Provinces, and their Example would have been followed by the Regencies of
other Cities, or they might have proposed in the States to acceed to the Treaty of
Alliance between France and America.

However, We ought to presume, that these Gentlemen know their own Countrymen and their
true Policy better than Strangers, and it may be their Intention to propose other
things in Course.

It is certain that they have animated the Nation to an high degree, so that a seperate
Peace, or any mean Concessions to Great Britain cannot now be made. The good Party
have the upper hand, and patriotic Councils begin to prevail.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient and most
humble Servant.

From Edmund Jenings

[dateline] Brussels Augst. 22d. 1781

[salute] Sir

I have the Honor of receiving your Excellencys Letter, of the 18th. Instant, This
Day.

Indeed, Sir, the Dutch have Acted Nobly. They have astonished their Friends and confounded
their Ennemies and have shewn that the contempt, in which they have hitherto been
held, did not result from the Body of the people. But whilst this Engagement in the
old stile may serve as an Hint to the English ought it not likewise to be a Hint to
the French? We should then have Sea Engagements more decisive than they are.

I think one may Easily see that a Congress to be held at Vienna will not be a very
expeditious One. The Grand Segnior at Constantinople will finish the Procés des trois
Rois as Soon.1

I am Sorry that your Excellency has not yet Receivd the Books. If Mr. Segourney would
write to the Merchant at Ostend, to whom they are consigned; it might hasten the dispatch
of them.

I received by this days Post the inclosed Letter <s> which I send to { 466 } your Excellency, for whose perusal they are intended.2 It is not necessary for me to make any Observations on it, but can assure your Excellency,
it comes from a well meaning faithful Man.

I find by the Duke de Crillons having passed the Straits of Gibralter, that I was
much mistaken in my political Guess.3 But I stil think my Idea was right whatever the Fact may be. Minorca if taken, is
no Object in this War, or indeed in any War if Gibraltar falls. This Measure will
Keep the Combind fleets Cruising about Cadiz at the Straits Mouth, while it ought
to be near the Coasts of Ireland to intercept the Homeward bound Fleets. France must
see this, but I suppose she is obliged to Humour Spain.

I am with the greatest Respect Sir your Excellencys Most Obedient Humble Servant

2. Jenings enclosed a letter he received from Edward Bridgen dated 17 August. Bridgen
desired JA to consider his plan to supply Congress with copper to produce coins, an idea he
previously discussed in detail with Benjamin Franklin (Franklin, Papers, 30:355–356, 429–431; 31:129–130). Also enclosed was the following note by Bridgen:

“He will furnish the following pieces of Copper in any quantity of the best quality;
The Sizes as follow—Of the weight and Size of the Tower Virginia half penny. 4 to
an Ounce. The weight and size of the English Tower half penny. 3 Peices of double
the weight of each as well as peices of half the size of the half pence but for these
last there may be some small addition the Ct. weight for extra trouble.

“All the Blanks to be smooth at the Edge with a smooth Surface.

“To be packed and delivered free of all Charges on Board at £ 10s per Ton. And to
engage to deliver Sixteen Tons every Ten Weeks. Provided he has liberty to draw for
the Amount at 2 Months the Bills of Lading Accompanying the Invoices. Copper may be
considerably lower again and expect it will.”

On 24 Oct.JA wrote Jenings that Bridgen's proposal was “wholly out of my department” and that
Congress was unlikely to enter into such an agreement with a British subject (Adams Papers).

3. The Duc de Crillon commanded the combined French and Spanish expedition to Minorca,
for which see John Bondfield's letter of 7 Aug., note 2, above. What Jenings' “political Guess” was is unclear, for he had not mentioned
Minorca in any previous letter to JA.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0348

Author: Adams, John

Recipient: Franklin, Benjamin

Date: 1781-08-23

To Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Amsterdam Aug. 23. 1781

[salute] Sir

I am desired to inclose, the within Copies to your Excellency: although I doubt not
you have received the original, and although I know not what may be in your Power
to do, for the Relief of Messrs. Curson and Governeur.1 Their pretended offence, is Sending warlike Stores to America altho the London Papers
Say, it was corresponding with me. I never received a Line from either of those Gentlemen,
nor { 467 } ever wrote to them more than a Line, Sometime last fall, to request them to Send Some
Letters and Gazettes to Congress. I have lately looked over those Letters, and find
nothing in them of Consequence, excepting Strong Warnings to our Countrymen not to
expect Peace, and Some free Stricktures upon the Conduct of Sir J. York, towards this
Republick, for which Reasons the British Ministry, will take Care not to publish them.

1. JA likely refers to copies of the Committee for Foreign Affairs' letter of 9 May to
Benjamin Franklin (Franklin, Papers, 35:48–49). The committee requested that Franklin give his “particular Attention”
to obtaining the exchange of the two men. For JA's correspondence with Samuel Curson and Isaac Gouverneur, see his second letter of
6 Aug. to the president of Congress, note 2, above; and the letter of 1 Sept. from Curson and Gouverneur, below.

To Benjamin Franklin

Last Evening I recieved your Excellency's Letter of the 16th. of this month, accompanied
with a Letter from the President of Congress containing the Commissions You mention.2

You desire to know what Steps have already been taken in this business.3 There has been no Step taken by me, in pursuance of my former Commission, until my
late Journey to Paris at the Invitation of the Comte de Vergennes, who communicated
to me certain Articles, proposed by the mediating Courts, and desired me to make such
Observations upon them, as should occur to me. Accordingly I wrote a Number of Letters
to his Excellency of the following Dates, July 13th. inclosing an answer to the Articles,
16th. 18th. 19th. 21st.4 I would readily send You Copies of the Articles and of those Letters, but there are
matters in them, which had better not be trusted to go so long a Journey, especially
as there is no Necessity for it.

The Comte de Vergennes will readily give You Copies of the Articles and of my Letters,
which will prevent all risque.

I am very apprehensive that our new Commission will be as useless as my old one. Congress
might very safely I believe permit Us all to go home, if We find no other business5, and stay there some Years: at least until every British Soldier in the United States
is killed or captivated. Till then Britain will never think of Peace, but for the
purposes of Chicanery.

I see in the Papers, that the British Ambassador at Petersbourg has recieved an Answer
from his Court to the Articles.6 What this Answer is, We may conjecture from the King's Speech. Yet the Empress of
Russia has made an Insinuation to their high Mightinesses, which deserves Attention.
Perhaps You may have seen it: but lest You should not, I will add a Translation of
it, which I sent to Congress in the time of it, not having the original at hand.7

“The Affection of the Empress to the Interests of the Republick of the United Provinces,
and her desire to see re established, by a prompt Reconciliation, a Peace and good
Harmony between the two maritime Powers, have been sufficiently manifested by the
Step which she had taken, in offering them her seperate Mediation.

“If She has not had the desired Success, her Imperial Majesty has only been for that
Reason the more attentive to search out means capable of conducting her to it. One
such mean offers itself in the combined Mediation of the two Imperial Courts, under
the Auspices of which it is to be treated at Vienna (il doit être traité a Vienne)
of a general Pacification of the Courts actually at War. It is only necessary for the Republick to regulate itself in the
same manner. Her Imperial Majesty, by an effect of her friendship for it, imposing
upon herself the Task of bringing her Co-mediator into an Agreement, to share with
her the Cares and the good Offices, which She has displayed in its favor As soon as
it shall please their high Mightinesses to make known their Intentions in this regard
to Mr. the Prince de Gallitzin, the Envoy of the Empress at the Hague, charged to
make to them the same Insinuation: this last will write of it immediately to the Minister
of her Imperial Majesty at Vienna, who will not fail to take with that Court the Arrangements
which are prescribed to him, to the end to proceed in this affair by the same formalities,
which We have made use of with the other Powers. Her Imperial Majesty flatters herself,
that the Republick will recieve this Overture, as a fresh proof of her Benevolence,
and of the Attention which She preserves, to cultivate the Ties of that friendship
and of that Alliance which subsists between them.”

I must beg the favour of your Excellency to communicate to me whatever You may learn,
which has any Connection with this Negotiation, particularly the French, Spanish and
British Answers to the Articles, as soon as You can obtain them. In my Situation,
it is not likely I shall obtain any Information of Consequence, but from the French
Court. Whatever may come to my Knowledge, I will communicate to You without delay.

If Britain persists in her two Preliminaries, as I presume She does, what will be
the Consequence? Will the two Imperial Courts permit this great plan, of a Congress
at Vienna, which is public and made the common talk of Europe, to become another sublime
Bubble, like the armed Neutrality? In what a light will these mediating Courts appear,
after having listened to a Proposition of England, so far as to make Propositions
themselves, and to refer to them in many public Acts, if Britain refuses to agree
to them? and insists upon such Preliminaries as are at least an Insult to France and
America, and a kind of Contempt to the common Sense of all Europe.

Upon my word I am weary of such round about and endless Negotiations, as that of the
armed Neutrality and this of the Congress at Vienna. I think the Dutch have at last
discovered the only effectual Method of Negotiation, that is by fighting the British
Fleets, until every Ship is obliged to answer the Signal for renewing the Battle by
the signal of distress. There is no Room for British Chicanery in this. If I ever
did any good since I was born, it was in stirring up the pure Minds of the Dutchmen,
and setting the old Batavian Spirit in motion, after having slept so long. Our dear
Country will go fast to sleep, in full Assurance of having News of Peace by Winter,
if not by the first Vessel. Allass! what a disappointment they will meet.8 I believe I had better go home and wake up our Countrymen out of their Reveries about
Peace. Congress have done very well to join others in the Commission for Peace.9 My Talent, if I have one lies in making War. The Grand Segnior will finish the Proces
des trois Rois sooner than the Congress at Vienna will make Peace, unless10 the two Imperial Courts act with Dignity and Consistency upon the occasion, and acknowledge
American Independency at once, upon Britain's insisting on her two insolent Preliminaries.

I have the honor to be, Sir, Your most obedient and most humble Servant

1. This is the last letter JA wrote until 4 October. During the intervening 39 days he suffered from a “nervous
fever of a very malignant kind, and so violent as to deprive me of almost all sensibility
for four or five days.” He recovered only through the “wondrous Virtue” of the “all-powerful”
Peruvian bark and the ministrations of his faithful secretary John Thaxter and Dr.
Nicolaas George Oosterdijk of the University of Leyden's medical faculty (to the president
of Congress, 15 Oct., Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:776–779; to C. W. F. Dumas, 18 Oct., LbC, Adams Papers). JA wrote to Benjamin Franklin on 4 Oct. that it was “the first Time that I have taken a Pen in hand to write to any body,
having been confined and reduced too low to do any kind of business” (Franklin, Papers, 35:556–558). Not until mid-Nov. did the volume of JA's correspondence approach its pre• { 470 } vious levels; on 14 Dec. he informed Francis Dana that he was recovering but remained “weak and lame” (MHi: Dana Family Papers; JA, Works, 7:493–495).

It cannot be said definitively what illness JA suffered from, for any diagnosis done more than two hundred years after the fact
must in the end rest largely on speculation. Many of the medical terms current in
the eighteenth century are either no longer used or have meanings different from those
in JA's day. Dr. Oosterdijk's notes and testimony of his examination are unavailable and
JA's own descriptions, those of a layman, lack precision.

The inherent difficulty of diagnosing JA's illness has not deterred some biographers from making the attempt. Peter Shaw,
in the Character of John Adams (Chapel Hill, 1976, p. 150–152), and James H. Hutson, in John Adams and the Diplomacy of the American Revolution (Lexington, Ky., 1980, p. 97–98), see JA as mentally unstable, even paranoid, and conclude that his illness was psychosomatic.
John Ferling, in John Adams, A Life (Knoxville, 1992, p. 237–238), wrote that JA contracted malaria, a view David McCullough shared in his John Adams (N.Y., 2001, p. 264–266). But Ferling, in an article entitled “John Adams' Health
Reconsidered” that he co-authored with Lewis E. Braverman (WMQ, 3d ser., 55:83–104 [Jan. 1998]), declared that JA was likely a victim of Graves' disease, so that his “behavior was not, as many have
thought, the result of problems in his head or his heart, but in his thyroid.”

The editors believe JA's illness was physical and most likely indigenous to the Netherlands. JA wrote to Ferdinand Grand on 12 Oct. (LbC, Adams Papers) that he was the victim of “an Amsterdam Fever, which they call an Introduction to
the Freedom of the City,” implying that it was normal for one foreign to Amsterdam
to fall ill in the course of acclimating himself to the locale. Indeed, on 5 Oct. Benjamin Franklin wrote: “I hope this Seasoning will be the means of securing your
future Health, by accommodating your Constitution to the Air of that Country” (Adams Papers; Franklin, Papers, 35:565–567). And JA later wrote that it was “the destiny of every stranger who goes into Holland to encounter
either an intermittent or bilious fever within the two first years” (JA, Corr. in the Boston Patriot, p. 533).

A diagnosis of malaria is attractive because it was endemic to the Netherlands, particularly
in North Holland. Physicians would have been familiar with the symptoms and with the
prescribed treatment: Peruvian bark or quinine. Moreover, from their reported symptoms
it is likely that JA's son CA, his servant Joseph Stephens, and his secretary John Thaxter all suffered from malaria.

But JA's descriptions of his illness are at variance with the classic symptoms of malaria.
Malaria is a periodic fever, that is, the victim suffers severe chills and then a
fever that reaches a peak and then subsides, only to return two or three days later.
In the intervals between the fever, the patient may appear and feel in good health.
JA, however, nowhere describes his fever as periodic or “tertian,” as he does CA's in the spring of 1781 (Adams Family Correspondance, 4:108). Instead, he states that he suffered a high fever of at least five days' duration
and was unable to work for well over a month.

JA's repeated statements that he suffered from a “nervous fever” present another possibility.
The term “nervous fever” is another name for typhus in medical reference books of
the time (Quincy's Lexicon Physico-Medicum, 8th edn., N.Y., 1802; Robert Hooper, A Compendious Medical Dictionary, Boston, 1801; The Philadelphia Medical Dictionary, Phila., 1808). Typhus causes a rapidly rising fever that peaks at 102 to 105 degrees
during the first two or three days and is then sustained for another five. In the
course of the fever the patient experiences delirium and, on or about the fifth day,
a dark red rash of elevated spots appears. Thereafter the fever falls rapidly, assuming
that the outcome is favorable (Cambridge World History of Human Disease, ed. Kenneth F. Kiple, N.Y., 1993, p. 1080–1081). The use of Peruvian bark would
have reflected contemporary medical practice for typhus, because while quinine was
used for malarial fevers, it was used also “for most patients who had been debilitated
by continued fevers” (J. Worth Estes, Dictionary of Protopharmacology, Therapeutic Practices, 1700–1850, Canton, Mass., 1990, p. 48). These are approximately the symptoms and the treatment
JA described in his letters, particularly those of 9 Oct. to his wife (Adams Family Correspondance, 4:224), and 15 Oct. to the president of Congress (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:776–779).

A diagnosis of typhus is intriguing, but no less speculative than others that have
been proposed. Ultimately all that can be said is that JA had a serious, debilitating illness in 1781 that severely curtailed his activities
for months. Its precise nature is unknown.

3. At this point in the Letterbook is the following canceled passage: “Upon my first
arrival at Paris with a Commission to join in Conference for Peace, I presented a
Copy of it to the Comte de Vergennes, and from that Time no one step whatever has
been taken by me.” For JA's initial exchange with Vergennes over the original peace commission, see JA, Diary and Autobiography, 4:243–245, 250–254; and vol. 8:320–321, 328, 337, 362–363, 367.

5. At this point in the Letterbook is the canceled passage “but makin Peace.”

6. See JA's first letter of 6 Aug. to the president of Congress, calendared above.

7. JA included the following translation in his second letter of 16 Aug. to the president of Congress, calendared above. See that letter for JA's comments; for the source of the translation and the document itself, see C. W.
F. Dumas' letter of 3 July, and note 1, above.

8. In the Letterbook JA originally ended the letter at this point, but then canceled his closing, inserted
the final sentence of this paragraph, and added a new closing. After further reflection,
he wrote the three sentences beginning “I believe” below the new closing and marked
it for insertion at this point.

9. In the Letterbook this sentence ends “who have Some faculties for it.”

10. At this point in the Letterbook is the canceled passage “of which I have no hope.”

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0350

Author: Warren, Winslow

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-08-29

From Winslow Warren

[dateline] Richlieu street Paris Augst. 29 1781

[salute] Sir

Mr. Mason here has received letters from his Father in Virginia to the 3 of June1 which inform him that at that time the Marquis la Fayette's force consisted of about
4000 men 1200 of which were Continental troops. That he would be joined in few days
after that by Genl. Wayne with 12 or 1500 Men which would make his force superiour
to Genl. Cornwallis but that the British had so much the advantage over the American
troops upon Account of the facility with which they were Enabled to transport their
troops from place to place that by the time the Militia had collected to oppose any
sudden inroad they had made they had as suddenly reimbarked Carrying with them every
thing they Conveniently could and what they could not they with their usual Barbarity
Wantonly distroyed and rendered useless. That Very Many of the inhabitants from the
highest state of affluence are by this conduct reduced to beggary. He further informs
that the Militia have turned out with the Greatest Alacrity at all times but are without
Arms or Ammunition for the Greater part of them. But that 1200 of them under Genrl.
Muhlenburg had Maintained a desperate Action in an open field with Very Near twice
their number for two hours and finally retreated carrying of [wi]th them all their wounded, artillery, &c.2 A party of the British had penetrated to Genrl. Washingtons Estate and stripped it
of Negroes &c. He discribes the desolated state of the Country were the British are
and have been in Very Affecting terms and also of the Countries between Charlestown
and the Roanoke to be intirely ruined. He pays the { 472 } highest encomiums to the Military Abilities of Genrl. Greene. He concludes his letter
with his wishes to meet his Son soon but he hopes Never to Meet him unless they meet
as free Men.

The Continental Currency their—and my Father informs me it is the same in Boston is
reduced to the last stage of wretchedness which introduces confusion in Commerce and
produces every evil Work. But I immagine you have letters from Boston which give you
every information about the Situation of Affairs their—but have taken the Liberty
of Giving you some extracts from Mr. Masons letters Not supposing it probable your
intelligence was so regular from the Seat of War. Mr. Mason [says?] they want Nothing but Arms and Ammunit[ion] and a loan of Money to drive the British intirely from that Country. I will send
to your Excellency by Doctr. Faulke some American Papers if I can obtain them. I hope
you arrived safe in Amsterdam after an agreable Ride and am with the Highest Respect
yr: Excellencys most Obedt: & very Hum: servt:

[signed] Winslow Warren

RC (Adams Papers); addressed: “His Excellency Hon: John Adams Esqr: Amsterdam”; endorsed by John Thaxter:
“Mr. Winslow Warren 29th. August 1781.” The removal of the seal has resulted in the
loss of some text.

1. For George Mason's letters to his son, George Mason Jr., see The Papers of George Mason, 1725–1792, ed. Robert A. Rutland, 3 vols., Chapel Hill, 1970, 2:689–695. Although Winslow Warren
based much of his account on two letters of 3 June, some of his references are to
matters that do not appear in those letters, such as the battle the militia fought
under Brig. Gen. John Peter Muhlenberg's command, the British sacking of Mt. Vernon,
and the statement attributed to Mason that all that was needed to defeat the British
was arms and a loan. This makes it likely that one or more additional letters from
Mason to his son have not been found.

2. The Battle of Petersburg occurred on 24 April and matched 1,000 militia, commanded
by Brig. Gen. John Peter Muhlenberg, against 2,500 British regulars, commanded by
Maj. Gen. William Phillips. The British drove the Americans from the field, but they
retreated in an orderly fashion after a spirited resistance (Henry A. Muhlenberg,
The Life of Major General Peter Muhlenberg of the Revolutionary Army, Phila., 1849, p. 247–252).

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0351

Author: Thaxter, John

Recipient: Franklin, Benjamin

Date: 1781-08-30

John Thaxter to Benjamin Franklin

I have the honor to acquaint your Excellency, that Mr. Adams has been much indisposed
for three weeks past with the fever of this Country, and is now so ill with it as
to be confined to his Bed, and unable to write. In a few days however it is probable
that the Violence of the Fever will abate. In the meantime, he has desired me to advise
your Excellency that he has recieved Information, that the British Government are
endeavouring to make secret Contracts by their { 473 } Agents with the Americans for Masts, Yards and Bowsprits, of which they are in want,
and for which they offer very great Prices.2

He submits it to your Excellency's Consideration, whether it would not be proper to
consult the French Court on this Occasion to know whether they would have any Objection
to Congress laying an Embargo on the Exportation of those Articles. Mr. Adams is of
opinion, that if an Exportation of them is permitted, those Agents will find methods
to accomplish their End, and give effectual Aid to the British Marine at this Juncture.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your Excellency's most obedient
and most humble Servant

1. This is the first of four extant letters that John Thaxter wrote on behalf of JA during his illness. The others are of 10 and 24 Sept. to C. W. F. Dumas and 19 Sept. to Joseph Reed, all below. For an indication that there may have been others,
now lost, see the letters of 6 and 17 Sept. from Jean Luzac and Edmund Jenings respectively, both below.

2. JA's source of information is unknown. Franklin did send the letter to Vergennes, thus
explaining its presence in the French archives. For Franklin's views on the matter,
see Franklin, Papers, 35:566–567; 36:24. JA communicated the information to Congress in a letter of 4 Dec. (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 5:36–38), but there is no indication that any action was taken.

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0352

Author: Franklin, Benjamin

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-08-31

From Benjamin Franklin

[dateline] Passy Augt. 31. 1781

[salute] Sir

I duly received the Letter you did me the honour of writing to me the 17th. Instant
inclosing a Copy of one from Mr. John Ross, acquainting me with the Presentation to
you of 51 Bills Drawn in his Favour the 22 June last on Mr. Henry Laurens; for the
Sum of 40,950 Guilders; and desiring to know whether I will pay them.

I have already paid or provided for the Payment of all the former Congress Bills on
Mr. Laurens, on Mr. Jay, and on yourself and me, drawn upon us when we had no Funds
in our hands to pay them. I have been exceedingly embarrass'd and distress'd by this
Business; and being obliged to apply repeatedly for Aids to this Court, with one unexpected
Demand after another, I have given Trouble and Vexation to the Ministers, by obliging
them to find new Funds for me, and thereby deranging their Plans. They have by their
Minister at Philada. complain'd of these irregular unfounded Drafts, to Congress;
and I am told that he receiv'd a Promise about the End of March last, that no more
should be issued. I have been obliged lately to apply for more money to discharge
such of these Bills as I had engag'd for and were { 474 } yet unpaid; and for other Purposes, and I obtained it on a Promise not to accept or
engage for any that should be drawn after the End of March, if such should be drawn,
which was not expected, as the Congress had Promis'd not to draw but upon known Funds.
I have received no Advice or Orders relating to those Bills of Mr. Ross. I cannot
conceive why they were drawn on Mr. Laurens known to be a Prisoner in the Tower. You
will see by the enclosed Copy of a letter from M. de V. that I am told very fairly
and explicitly, that if I accept any more such Bills I am not to expect any Assistance
from him in Paying them.1 I am therefore obliged to be explicit with you. I cannot accept, nor have any thing
to do with the Acceptance of them. I have obtain'd what you see mentioned in the Count's
Letter, which I was almost asham'd to ask and hardly expected. I cannot worry such
good Friends again for these new Drafts. Mr. Ross's demand was near 20,000£ Sterling.
I suppose these Bills will be followed by more. You once wrote to me that you thought
a few Protests of such Bills might be of Service to our Affairs in Holland.2 Perhaps none can arrive that may bear a Protest with less Inconvenience. And I think
the Practice will never cease, if not stopped by Protesting. The Bills are not drawn
upon you, nor recommended to your Care by Congress, and unless you have reason to
believe, that in the Term of Six months, you may by earnest Application obtain Remittances
to discharge them, I cannot advise your accepting them.3

I have the honour to be, with great Respect, Sir, Your most obedient and most humble
Servant

[signed] B Franklin

RC and enclosure (Adams Papers); addressed: “His Excellency John Adams Esqr. Minister from the United States of
America Amsterdam”; endorsed by John Thaxter: “Dr. Franklin 31st. Augst. 1781.” For
the enclosure, see note 1.

1. In a memorial of 24 March, the Chevalier de La Luzerne declared that he was persuaded
that the Congress, taking into consideration what it could reasonably expect from
its French ally, would “from this moment ... abstain from that ruinous measure of
drawing bills of exchange without the previous knowledge and consent of his majesty's
ministers.” This resulted in Congress' resolution of 10 April by which it declared
that no additional bills drawn on its ministers in Europe would be sold without its
“special direction” (JCC, 19:310, 368). Franklin enclosed a copy of a letter from Vergennes dated 23 Aug.
in which the foreign minister stated that France predicated its aid, including that
for the replacement of the goods lost on the Marquis de Lafayette, on Franklin accepting only those bills of exchange dated “antérieures au 1er. Avril
de cette année” (Franklin, Papers, 35:395). La Luzerne, citing a letter from Vergennes of 27 July, told Congress much
the same thing in a memorial of 24 Sept., which also included an account of the funds
supplied for use in 1781 (JCC, 21:1001–1006). For an additional comment by Franklin regarding his apprehensions
over the presentation of bills of exchange in the absence of funds to pay them, see
Morris, Papers, 2:261–263.

3. In accordance with this letter, the bills Larwood, Van Hasselt & Van Suchtelen presented
were not paid in 1781. The firm, how• { 475 } ever, did not end its efforts to collect, and on 14 Feb. 1782 wrote directly to Franklin
to request his influence in obtaining their acceptance. Soon thereafter additional
funds became available and Franklin authorized JA to accept the bills (Franklin, Papers, 36:575–576, 686). On 21 March, Larwood, Van Hasselt & Van Suchtelen wrote to Franklin
to inform him that the bills were paid (Cal. Franklin Papers, A.P.S., 2:463). Franklin wrote Robert Morris on 30 March that he had paid the bills and
avoided their being protested and that he was then engaged helping John Jay pay protested
bills drawn on him (Morris, Papers, 4:486–489).

Docno: ADMS-06-11-02-0353

Author: Curson, Samuel

Author: Gouverneur, Isaac

Recipient: Adams, John

Date: 1781-09-01

From Samuel Curson and Isaac Gouverneur

[dateline] London 1 Sepr. 1781

[salute] Sir

We had the pleasure to receive several letters from you before we left St. E– the
contents of which were properly attended to, our answers have good reason to think
did not reach you. Since that period our sufferings have been very great, but for
prudential reasons must be silent thereon. Beg to refer you to Mr. Jno. Witherspoon,1 who take the liberty of introducing to you. With the greatest respect we are, Sir
Your most obt. huml. serts.

1. The son of Rev. John Witherspoon, president of the College of New Jersey and a member
of the Continental Congress, John Witherspoon Jr. had served as surgeon on the privateer
De Graaf. The British captured him at St. Eustatius with Curson and Gouverneur, but released
him soon after his arrival in England (Franklin, Papers, 35:48, 439–440).

Jean Luzac to John Adams: A Translation

[dateline] Leyden 6 September 1781

[salute] Sir

It was with the greatest satisfaction and gratitude that I received, some time ago
from your Excellency, the collection of constitutions and other fundamental acts of
the federative Republic formed in the New World.1 I expressed my gratitude for this to Mr. Thaxter, but it is my duty to express my
great and sincere thanks to your Excellency. If this collection is by itself a testament
worthy of being preserved by every friend of true liberty and happiness for humanity,
then the copy that I possess is even more precious because of the one who was so kind
as to honor me with it. Indeed, I am infinitely flattered to receive it from one who
is distinguished among Ameri• { 477 } can legislators and to see the frontispiece adorned with a name that will pass into
posterity along with the most memorable revolution that the annals of the world will
record for us.

By the value I have attached to this copy, you will see, sir, why I have a request
to ask you. I know a man of letters who is currently working on a Dutch translation
of all the proceedings that the federal constitution and the state constitutions are
based on.2 The collection was already at the press, when he asked me if I had any pieces that
would be useful to him. I saw that he followed a French collection, printed in Paris
in 1778.3 I warned him that there were many subsequent acts, notably the new act of Union of
1778,4 that were not part of this collection. Finally, I showed him what I had due to your
kindness. He regretted the work he had already done and asked me insistently to give
him my copy. Before consenting to it, I took it upon myself to write to your Excellency
to ask if you could send him a copy, or at least lend him one for a time. It could
not be of greater use than to show to our compatriots the excellent principles that
are followed in America to ensure political, civil, and religious liberty. There is
also work being done here now on another Dutch edition of American works, which, I
hope, will please you.

I was extremely distressed to hear that you are not in good health. I hope to hear
more agreeable news of this soon. Please accept the assurance of my respectful sentiments,
with which I have the honor to be, sir, your very humble and very obedient servant

1. The Constitutions of the Several Independent States of America; the Declaration of
Independence; the Articles of Confederation between the said States;..., Phila., 1781. In a letter of 25 Sept. 1780, JA recommended that Congress publish a collection of American constitutions for distribution
in Europe, and on 29 Dec. 1780 the Congress resolved to print two hundred copies of
such a compilation at its expense (vol. 10:176, 178–179; JCC, 18:1217). The resulting publication went through numerous American and British editions
(same, 21:1200–1203). Congress presumably sent JA copies for distribution in Europe, but when or how this was accomplished is unknown.
Nor is there any indication in the Adams Papers as to when JA gave Luzac a copy.

From Francis Dana

It is not through want of attention that I have omitted to this time, to acquaint
you of our arrival in this City. We reached it, after some perils, on the 27th. of
Augt. N.S. sufficiently fatigued I assure you. For from Leipsic I began to travel
day and night, and continued this practise all along the remaining distance. At Berlin
we rested, or were rather stopped, nine days by the unfortunate accident of our voiture's
being overthrown and broken into peices, between Leipsic and Berlin, the first time
I attempted to travel in the night. I there bought a new one, which was warrantd to
carry us to St. Petersbourg and back again, in the utmost safety. This however failed
in essential parts, and required many repairs on the way. Notwithstanding the above
accident, I found our advance so slow, through the abominable defects of Germans Posts,
that I resolved to risk all again, and persist in travelling in the night; fortunately
nothing of the like kind happened to us. We rested afterwards a day or two, at the
following places, Dantzick, Konigsberg, Memel, Riga, and Narva, at most of which stages
our voiture demanded repairs. This gave me an opportunity, perhaps not wholly unprofitable
to our Country, to make enquiries into the commerce of these Towns; for they are all
of them Ports. On the whole from Amsterdam to this City, we were fifty one days. Mr.
Jennings gave me all Augt. to get in; but for the accident to my first voiture, and
some detentions for the repairs of my second, I wou'd have accomplished my journey
12 or 14 days sooner with equal fatigue.1 After all, you will not be surprised to learn I am told, in effect, that I am here too soon—that the proper time is not yet come. In the name of common sense, I was about to
ask you, what this Gentry can mean; but I believe we are at no loss to answer this
question. I am promised however in the most flattering terms, every assistance in
matters touching the joint or common interests of the two Houses, yet I am told not
to expect it in matters that may be injurious to one, without being advantageous to
the other.2 Such frivolous reasons appeared to me to have been assigned to show the time is not
yet come, that I have presumed to question them. This I imagine may give offence,
when I wou'd not wish to do it. But must an implicit faith but put in all things which
may come from a certain quarter? Happily all our communications have hitherto been
in writing: so { 479 } that they, whose right it is to judge each of us, may do it understandingly. I am
not disappointd in this difference of sentiments upon my main business, yet I am somewhat
shocked that I have been here 12 days, since he knew in a proper way, of my being
in Town, and have not received the least mark of attention from our friend,3 except what may be contained in civil words only. The reason of this, we may conjecture,
and perhaps we shall not be far from the Truth. I suspect Ishmael4 may have been a little instrumental in this conduct. It cannot be without design,
I think. I have candidly, and I believe decently given my own sentiments upon the
subject, and told our friend, what measures I intended to pursue, to endeavour at
least to come at the end in view. He received my letter on the evening of the 25th.
[5 Sept. N.S.]5 but I have yet had no answer. It was a long one, it is true, and he not understanding
English, must have it translated; so that I do not absolutely conclude that he will
not answer it. He communicated to me in confidence, what had been communicated to
me before in the same way, touching a proposal made, to speak in plain English, by
the Mediators, agreable to our utmost wishes: He did not tell me, as the other person6 had done, that the Mediation was rejected on account of that proposition by the Court
of London. This I suppose to be the truth, though not a lisp of it is to be heard
yet without doors here. I wish soon to receive a confirmation of it from your hand:
when I can make that use of it I now want exceedingly to make of it. I take it to
be a matter of great consequence to our Interests, and I build many hopes upon it
in aid of my business. It seems to open the real good disposition of those Sovereigns
for our Cause. I have made use of an argument of this sort to our friend in my last—Do
not withold from me a moment, any information which you think can be improved to our advantage. Let no supposition
that I may be otherwise informed of it, stay your hand. What comes from you, I shall
think myself at liberty to make use of, at my discretion. You must have gained informations
on your late tour, which will be of importance to me.

Your Son is still with me at the Hotel de Paris. He is desirous of my procuring him
a private Instructor. I shou'd like this very well, as I shou'd be fond of having
him with me, but I cannot yet obtain proper information upon this head—I shall endeavour
to do the best with him. Your sentiments on this point may not be amiss—I beg you
to write me under cover to Messieurs Strahlborn & Wolff Banquiers à St. Petersbourg. I had like to have forgot
our news of the Action between the Dutch and English. The former it is agreed here
acquit• { 480 } ted themselves most nobly: but why were they sent out so feeble upon so important
a business?

My best regards to Mr. Thaxter, and all our Amsterdam friends, pray tell him he must
write me all the publick news, especially from our Country. This is the finest City
I have seen in Europe, and far surpasses all my expectations: Alone, it is sufficient
to immortalize the memory of Peter the first. More of the real grandure of this City
and Empire hereafter. In the mean time I beg to assure you of the continuance of that
high respect and warm affection I have entertained for you long since Your Friend
& much obliged Humble Servant

[signed] FRA DANA

RC and enclosure (Adams Papers); endorsed on the first page: “recd Decr 14.1781” by John Thaxter on the fourth page:
“Augt 28th. 1781.” RC filmed at 28 Aug. (Adams Papers, Microfilms, Reel No. 355). Enclosure: notation by JA on the first page: “[Stra]hlborn and Wolff, Banquiers a St. Petersbourg”; notation by Francis Dana on the fourth
page: “Cyphers J.A. & F.D.” filmed with Ciphers and Cipher Keys (same, Reel No. 602).
A corner of the folded enclosure is torn, resulting in the loss of a number of words
on pages one through three.

1. For detailed accounts of Dana's and JQA's journey to St. Petersburg, see Francis Dana Journal, Amsterdam to St. Petersburg,
1781 (MHi: Dana Family Papers); and JQA, Diary, 1:89–101. Dana's Journal has not been published in full, but W. P. Cresson quotes substantial
portions of it in, Francis Dana: A Puritan Diplomat at the Court of Catherine the Great, N.Y., 1930, p. 157–166. For letters recounting the journey, see Dana's of 28 July
and 15 Sept. to the president of Congress (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:610–613, 710–714); and JQA's of 1 and 19 Sept. to JA and John Thaxter, respectively (Adams Family Correspondance, 4:206–207, 214).

2. Dana wrote to the Marquis de Verac, the French minister at St. Petersburg, on 30 Aug.
to announce his arrival and received a reply, likely of the same date, in which Verac
indicated that the Comte de Vergennes had written to prepare him for Dana's arrival.
Dana wrote again on 1 Sept. to inform the French diplomat more particularly of his
reasons for coming to Russia. Verac replied on the following day and, in this and
the previous two sentences, Dana gives the substance of Verac's letter (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:681, 683–685). That Verac was enunciating French policy is clear from the Chevalier
de La Luzerne's remarks to a congressional committee on 28 May. There he declared
that “the appointment of Mr. Dana, therefore, appears to be at least premature; and
the opinion of the council is that this deputy ought not to make any use of his powers
at this moment” (JCC, 20:562–563). Dana enclosed copies of his correspondence with Verac with his letter
of 15 Sept. to the president of Congress and it was only after they arrived that Congress,
on 27 May 1782, resolved that he should not “present his letters of credence...until
he shall have obtained satisfactory assurances that he will be duly received and recognized
in his public character” (same, 22:301).

5. In his letter of 4 Sept. to Verac, Dana provided additional information about his
mission and his views regarding its implementation. In his reply of 12 Sept., Verac
went into greater detail than previously concerning his views of Dana's mission, as
well as the proposed peace conference and the participation of American negotiators
(Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:695–699, 705–707). For the significance of Verac's letters of 2 and 12 Sept. insofar
as they clarified the nature of the proposed peace negotiations and French policy
regarding them, see JA's letter of 21 July to Vergennes, note 3, above.

6. Probably one of the Dutch diplomats at St. Petersburg. In his letter of 15 Sept. to
the president of Congress, Dana indicated that his other source of information about
the mediation was “a public minister” in St. Petersburg (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:710–714), and in his letter of 17 Dec., Dana informed JA that he had derived “considerable advantage” from his good relationship with the
Dutch minister (Adams Papers).

For words in general, take Entick's new spelling Dictionary printed by Edw. & Chas.
Dilly in the Poultry London 1772.2 This book is paged throughout, and printed two columns a page. The common course is to give the p[age,] next the column of that page, and lastly t[he place?] in the column in which the word in[tended is?] to be found. Thus No. 71. 1. 15. that is [page] 71. first column and 15th. line you will [find the?] word which was intended viz. Co[nfederation].3

But to be still more secure [you may choose?] to give the page opposite to t[he one intended?] and to reckon the columns from the right to the left, 1, 2, 3, 4. across both pages, and the lines from the bottom of the Column. Thus, to give the same word, No. 70. 2. 23. You pass over to the opposite
page which is 71. and reckon the columns from the right, instead of the left, and
counting up from the bottom of the second column to the 23d. word, you will find it
the same. The 3d. column by the same rule, will give the word Conders, and the 4th. Concord.

This method will hold in all but the first page, which has no opposite, will render
the decyphering extremely difficult, if not impracticable, for a person acquainted
with the general method, by seeing that neither the page or the number of the Columns
cited, agree with the book will conclude the reference made to some other. It is at
the same time, I think, equally easy [an]d attended with very little trouble. Those [cyphers?] J.L. has sent you, are exceeding trou[bleso]me and tedious. I know you dislike [corresp]onding in Cyphers, but it may be [at times?] highly expedient. I shou'd have [ . . . ] upon a certain matter which has [ . . . ], but I dare not trust it.

RC and enclosure (Adams Papers); endorsed on the first page: “recd Decr 14.1781” by John Thaxter on the fourth page:
“Augt 28th. 1781.” RC filmed at 28 Aug. (Adams Papers, Microfilms, Reel No. 355). Enclosure: notation by JA on the first page: “[Stra]hlborn and Wolff, Banquiers a St. Petersbourg”; notation by Francis Dana on the fourth
page: “Cyphers J.A. & F.D.” filmed with Ciphers and Cipher { 482 } Keys (same, Reel No. 602). A corner of the folded enclosure is torn, resulting in
the loss of a number of words on pages one through three.

The content of all or some notes that appeared on this page in the printed volume
has been moved to the end of the preceding document.

1. It seems likely that this document was enclosed with the present letter. Evidence
is provided by JA's reply of 14 Dec. (MHi: Dana Family Papers). There Adams indicated that the letter of 8 Sept., which had arrived that very day, was the first that he had received since Dana's
departure. Then, in the fourth paragraph of his reply, JA began using the code supplied to him by Dana. It is significant that this very lengthy
paragraph was done prior to JA's announcements, in the fifth paragraph, that he had received, “this Evening,” Dana's
letter of 15 Sept. to the president of Congress (Wharton, ed., Dipl. Corr. Amer. Rev., 4:710–714) and, in a postscript dated 15 Dec., that he had just received Dana's
letter of 22 Oct. (Adams Papers).

2. John Entick, The New Spelling Dictionary, London, 1772. Although Dana explains very clearly how to use a dictionary code,
there is no evidence that Dana or JA ever used it in their correspondence.

From Job Field and Others

[dateline] Mill Prison September 8th. 1781 Plimouth In England

[salute] Dear Sir

We Are Extreamly Sorry To Troughble you with A Letter of this Kind, But Our Unfortunate
Situation In A Kingdom Remote From All Our friends And Distitute of Cash, Drives Us
to the Necessity of Requesting You for the Sake of our Parents Wich Ware Your Neighbours
and Acquaintances To Supply Us With Some Small Sums of Cash—Wich You may Either Carge
to Our Parents, or Our Selfs, And the Same Shall be faithfully Paid to Mrst. Adams
In Brantree, Who Was In Good Health On the 22th. of April Last, When We Left our Native
Place—We Wrote You A Letter Some time Past on this Same Subject, But Immagin It Miscarryd,
We Can Not Point out any Person For Your Purpouse of Sending to—We Leave It To Your
Judgment, and Would Conclude Beging of you As Our Only friend, Not to forget Your
Unfortunate Friends—And Neighbours1

1. This is the first of over twenty letters JA exchanged over the next twelve months concerning twelve of his neighbors from Braintree
and Milton. All had been captured in June on board the Salem privateer Essex, Capt. John Cathcart, and committed to Mill Prison in July. In addition to the five
men who signed the letter, the prisoners included Nathaniel Beale, an unnamed Beale,
Gregory and Lemuel Clark, Lewis Glover, William Horton, and Thomas Vinton. For the
most detailed and informative account of JA's efforts on behalf of the prisoners, see AA's letter of 9 Dec., and note 3 (Adams Family Correspondance, 4:255–261); and for criticism of the aid JA provided, see Isaac Collins' letter dated March 1782 (Adams Papers).

John Thaxter to C. W. F. Dumas

I blush to aknowledge that I have not given you a more early Intimation of Mr. Adams's
Return from Paris: but I hope you will pardon it.

Mr. Adams has had a very severe nervous Fever, and is now recov• { 484 } | view ering, but still too weak to see company, he has charged me to present his compliments
to you, and to acquaint you, that altho' he should be happy in your company, yet he
finds himself too feeble, at present to enjoy the pleasures of it. You may rely upon
it, Sir, that I will acquaint you when his Health is better established. I wish to
keep his mind and attention as much diverted from political affairs as possible for
the present moment.

My best Respects to Madame Dumas and your Daughter if you please.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest Respect, Sir, your most humble Servant.

From Henry Grand

[dateline] Paris sept 14th. 1781

[salute] Sir

At the receit of your Letter1 I imparted your observations, concerning your Account, to Dr. Franklin, for the consideration
of which he demanded a few days, it is but lately that he answered me verbally, “that
he had allowd and payd to Mr. Fr. Dana all that was due to him for his Salaries, and
that he was doing the Same with respect to you by means of his order to give you credit
for
120.000, and moreover that in case you had paid some thing to Mr. Dana you might claim
it, I mean charge it to Congress, or get it reimbursed from Mr. Dana.”

This answer I craved to have upon Paper, they promised to send it me at first leisure,
by means of which I have made out the State of your Account with me, which I herewith
include and the Ballance of which is
2557.16 I owe you and which I have ordered Messrs. Fizeaux Grand & Ce. to pay you
on requisition. I also return the State of Account you made, to give you more facility
in the Examination of mine, and you will be so Kind as to inform me how you have found
it.2

Herewith you will find Copy of Mr. J. Williams wine Bill for which I paid him pursuant
to your desires
1032.10 as you will see in your Account which I charged of as much.

It has never happened, I dare Say, Sir, that publick Felicity was a Nuisance to you;
it is the case, however for the Wine you have in my Cellar. The Crop proves to be
a most abundant one, so much so that Wine is at present very cheap, which makes me
fear you will be the loser for that part remaining, and altho I drink plenty and often
to your good Health yet am fraid not to make a quick end of it.

From Edmund Jenings

[dateline] Brussels Septr. 17. 1781

[salute] Sir

I Hope this will find Your Excellency's Health well established, and that your Disorder
has not left the Remains usually attendant on it, but that your wonted Spirit and
Fortitude are continud, for indeed, they are necessary to you at this Juncture, if
I am rightly informed of a late transaction in America, which has grievd and Confounded
me above Measure. The Hints given me of it are imperfect, but I suppose, the fact
is clear, that his Excellency at Passy is made Coadjutor with your Excellency in the
great Work of Peace, and this at a Time, when He had declared that the Multiplicity
of business was too great for his Old Shoulders. The Design of this Measure is Manifest
but suffer it not, let me entreat your Excellency, to succed. Keep firm in your place,
and if you cannot do any good, Struggle hard to prevent Mischief. Should your Excellency
retire, which I Know you are too much disposed to, I shall almost Dispair.

Has your Excellency receivd the Books. My Correspondents Friend has been here, and
has done every thing in his Power to find out, where they are stopped: in his inquiries,
He found out those that were addressed to me, they were detained at Bruges for some
Petty Duties. I have receivd them, and least yours should not have come to Hand, give
me leave to make the following extracts from Mine, which I do with much Pleasure,
as they are relative to, and make honorable mention of your Excellency.1

“The Latter End of this Year (1765) procured to be printed in the London Chronicle,
'a Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law,' during the ferment Occasioned by the
Stamp Act. This Excellent performance passed for a long while for the Work of Jeremy
Gridley Esqr. Attorney Gen. of the Province of Massachusets Bay, Member of the general
Court, Colonel of the first regiment of Militia and grand Master of the Free Masons,
who died at Boston Sept. 10. 1767. { 486 } This Mr. Hollis had noted at the End of Dr. Chaunceys Sermon on the repeal of the
Stamp Act.

“But He was afterwards better informed, and accordingly wrote at the End of his Copy
of this Dissertation, printed by Almon 1768. 'This Dissertation on the Canon and feudal
Law was written by John Adams Esqr. a young Gentleman of the Law, who lately removed
from the Country to Boston. He has a large Practice and will probably be soon at the
Head of his Profession.2

“We Suppose till we have better Information, this is the Gentleman, who has made so
consequential and conspicuous a figure in the Congress of the United States of America.
Perhaps only the Son of that Patriot. Be that as it may, whoever reads the Dissertation
itself with Attention and a proper Comprehension of the Subject, will not Scruple
to Acknowledge, that the Author was very capable of assisting with effect in the formation
of a New Republic upon the Principles professed by the Colonists.” Vol 1st. p. 291.

“In the Year 1765 was published in the Boston Gazette 'a Dissertation on the Canon
and Feudal Law' the Author of which was supposed to be Jeremy Gridley Esqr. Attorn.
Gen. &c. of Massachusets Bay, as mentioned Above.

“The Author, however, was discovered at length to be the Individual John Adams, whose
exertions in Opposition to the Vindictive and precipitate measures of Britain, hath
greatly contributed to rescue America from the Influence of Tory Politics, and thereby
to save his Country from the Pillage and Oppression of a set of wretched Counsellors
and their Tools, whom to the Astonishment of the World, the Men of England still suffer
to misguide their Councils, with a Patience, for which it would be in Vain to look
for Examples among her Ancestors.

“This Year, 1768, Mr. Hollis Prevaild on Mr. Almon in Piccadilly to print a Collection
of Letters sent from the House of Representatives of the Province of Massachusets
Bay to several persons of high Rank in this Kingdom, containing the true Sentiments
of America; at the End of this Collection was added the Dissertation On the Canon
and Feudal Law and a Letter, which appeared in a London Paper Janry. 7th. 1768 written
by the same Mr. Adams.3

“Soon after this Collection came out Dr. Elliot first informed Mr. Hollis, that the
Dissertation was the Work of Mr. Adams. Part of Mr. Hollis's Answer is as follows

“The two discourses of Mr. Adams appear to me to be among the best publications produced
by North America, and as the Author is { 487 } possessed of Learning, Industry, Spirit, is, it is apprehended, Young; and the Times
are likely to run very, very, very base, He, and such as He, cannot be too much encouraged.
In the minds of a few, not in Numbers, doth the Safety felicity of States, depend. Crown Him with Oak Leaves, especially
ye Men of Massachusets, when festivating on a Gaudy Day, under the Tree of Liberty,
for having asserted, maintained the Wisdom of your Ancestors in their prime Law, the
fixed Settlement of a Grammarian, that is a Man of Approved Character and Virtue in
all their Townships.

“To this your whole Spirit is owing and with me, less a Calamity it would be, the
present Slaughter of ten Thousand of your Wisest Stoutest Men, than the Destruction
of that Law.4

“The passage alluded to by Mr. Hollis is to be found p. 126 of Almons Edition of the
Dissertation of the Canon and Feudal Law, and is worth transcribing.

“But the Wisdom and Benevolence of our Fathers restd not here. They made an Early
provision by Law, that every Town, consisting of so many Families, should be furnished
with a grammar School. They made it a Crime for such a Time to be destitute of a Grammar
School Master for a few Months, and subjected it to a heavy penalty. So that the Education
of all Ranks of People was made the Care and expence of the public in a Manner, I
believe, that has been unknown to any other people antient or modern.5

“This Period, and that which went before it, and that which followed it appeared in
the London Chronicle July 28 with the following Address

“The following Extract from a Dissertation on the Canon and feudal Law written at
Boston in N England in the Year 1765 then printed there and since reprinted here,
is with all respects tendered by An Englishman.” 1 Vol. p. 400[–401].

“May the 10th. 1769 Mr. Hollis writes to his reverend Friend at Boston: 'Doctr. Coleman
in his Sermon supposes this Law (for establishing Grammar Schools) gives you a great
Superiority over the parent Kingdom. It is a Just Remark, I do not recollect to have
read of any such a Law as yours among the Antients, however Obvious and Excellent.
That Law, it is supposed, you owe to the truly reverend Mr. Cotton whose Abstract
shews great Abilitys under some particularities, and a Subject in his Day, not in
all respects, it may be investigated and discussed.

“In the same Letter He writes, 'the Agent for the Province of Massachusets should
always be a native of that Province, of a decent Family, liberally bred to Government
and to Law especially; should be sent out for three years, being first Solemnly harangued,
sworn by the prime Fathers of the Land to Trustiness and Magnanimity, maintaind Amply,
then certainly recalled to Honor and Emolument at Home, or to contempt and Infamy.
Men of this Cast were Smith and Cheke, Secretaries to that wonderful Young King Edw.
6th. Their Lives are now sent to Harvard College; and of all Statesmen, worthies during
the Long Glorious reign of Queen Elizabeth, and Men of like Cast, I am Confident,
are now among you. John Adams Esqr. for Example, young too and Active, as ingenuous.
The Times are great, and your and our Necessities; and nations rise and fall by Individuals,
not numbers, as all History, I think, fully proves.

“You see I Scribble boldly; yet rather with some Idea, that it will not prove altogether
unacceptable to you, that I do so.

“The Agent thus outlined to you is nearly the Kind of Person, which the Venetian Senate
usually sends out on Real business to States and Princes, though still more Liberal.

“We apprehend this Character of a Colony Agent, was partly intended as a Contrast
to the Character of the Author, (supposed to be Mauduit) of the Controversy between
Great Britain and her Colonies reviewed,7 who it seems had been intrusted with the Agency for the Colonies some time before.”
Vol. 1st. p. 416.

Surely your Excellency cannot be displeased at this Judgment passed on your Work,
and this public Testimonial of your Merit given by so worthy and so sagacious a Man,
as the late Mr. Hollis. I protest to your Excellency, that if I could gain the Approbation
of such an Individual, I should not be Anxious of any public Applause for that I Know
is frequently given most undeservedly, and as frequently withheld most ungratefully.
It is too precarious for any Man to rest his Comfort on. Mr. Hollis's Esteem was not
Easily Obtained, but when it was so, it was ever much prized, for it was Known to
be well founded.

The Memoirs of Mr. Thomas Hollis are comprised in two Volumes large Quarto. The Print
of them is most beautiful and the Engravings of the Heads of Milton, Lock, Bulstrade,
Sidney, Doctr. Mahon8 &c. &c. are done most Elegantly indeed. The Work is such, and treats of such Matters,
that give me leave to say your Excellency must have it; and therefore, if that, which
the Publisher, meant for your Excellency, does not come to Hand Mine is at your Excellencys
Service.9

The Memoirs mention the Money coined in N England 1652, which the Author supposes
a professed Antiquary will in some remote period seek for with avidity. The present
Mr. Hollis has not one of the peices, but is an antiquary and a professed Friend to
N England and therefore will certainly be glad of one. I have a Peice of that Coin;
but should your Excellency have one, and are willing to part with it, I am confident
it will be receivd from you with more than ordinary Respect. If your Excellency has
not one, I will send mine to the Man, whom I esteem so much.10

By a Letter from Madrid I find that his Excellency Mr. Jay is in a poor State of Health
and that it is supposed the Emperor intrigues Covertly in favor of Britain.

Has your Excellency heard of the Northern Travellers? I will not trouble your Excellency
with writing of the Conduct of the combined fleet of 49 Vessels of the Line.

I beg your Excellency would make my best Respects to Mr. Thaxter, to whom I have been
lately much obliged for his Correspondence.

I am with the greatest Respect Sir your Excellencys Most Devoted and Obedient Humble
Servant

1. The following quotations are taken from Francis Blackburne's Memoirs of Thomas Hollis, Esq., 2 vols., London, 1780, 1:291, 400–401, 416–417. JA copied them on a separate sheet which he enclosed in his letter of 21 Oct. to AA (Adams Family Correspondance, 4:232). The enclosure is now in MHi: Cranch Family Papers, where it is dated 1781. They concern JA's “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law” (vol. 1:103–128), a series of anonymous essays written and first published in 1765 in the Boston Gazette. Hollis was so impressed with the “Dissertation” that he procured its republication
in the London Chronicle of 23, 28 Nov., 3, 26 Dec. 1765 and later in a pamphlet entitled The True Sentiments of America, London, 1768, p. 111–143.

3. The letter published in the London Chronicle and reprinted in True Sentiments (p. 143–158) was not by JA, but by Benjamin Franklin. It is usually referred to as his “Causes of the American
Discontents before 1768” (Franklin, Papers, 15:3–13).

4. The following two paragraphs are an almost verbatim quotation of a passage in the
Memoirs that itself was taken from Thomas Hollis' letter of 1 July 1768 to Andrew Eliot (MHi: Thomas Hollis Papers). Hollis, in fact, wrote to commend “the two discourses of
Rev. Amos Adams,” rather than JA's “Dissertation.” Hollis referred specifically to the minister's Religious Liberty, An Invaluable Blessing: Illustrated in two Discourses Preached
at Roxbury, Decr. 3, 1767, being the day of General Thanksgiving ..., Boston, 1768. The Rev. Amos Adams (Harvard, 1752) was JA's distant cousin and the minister of the First Congregational Church of Roxbury (Sibley's Harvard Graduates, 13:178–186).

5. As indicated in the following two paragraphs, this “period” or paragraph was taken
verbatim from True Sentiments, along with the paragraphs that immediately preceded and followed it, and, with a
dedication to Catherine the Great, were printed in the London Chronicle of 26–28 July 1768. For the corresponding text from the “Dissertation” as originally
published in the Boston Gazette, see vol. 1:120.

7. This pamphlet, published at London in 1769, has at various times been attributed to
Israel Mauduit, then the Massachusetts colo• { 490 } nial agent in London. It was, however, most likely the work of William Knox assisted,
perhaps, by George Grenville (DNB). For a discussion of the authorship of the pamphlet, see T. R. Adams, American Controversy, 1:126–127.

John Thaxter to Joseph Reed

[dateline] Amsterdam 19th. Septr. 1781

[salute] Sir

I have the honor to acquaint your Excellency, that Mr. Adams has for sometime past
been confined to his Bed with a Fever; and tho' at present upon his Recovery, yet
is still too feeble to write. He has therefore directed me to acknowledge the Receipt
of your Excellency's two Letters of 14th. and 21st. July to the Honorable Mr. Searle,1 who sailed about a month since in the South Carolina, Commodore Gillon.

Mr. Adams has requested me to present his Respects to your Excellency, and to assure
You, Sir, that he is very sensible of the Confidence which You have reposed in him,
and that the utmost Care shall be taken of those Letters and Papers. Mr. Adams is
the more particularly obliged to your Excellency in addressing them to him, as they
contain more clear and satisfactory Accounts of the State of public affairs, than
any Letters or Papers he has as yet seen from America.

He hopes Mr. Searle, who left no reasonable measure unessayed to accomplish the purpose
of his Mission, will soon be with your Excellency to explain in Person the Reasons
why he has not succeeded.2

1. The letters from Reed, President of the Executive Council of Pennsylvania, to James
Searle have not been found, but for their content, see JA's letter of 20 Oct. to James Searle (LbC, Adams Papers).

2. For Searle's comments regarding his failure to raise a European loan for Pennsylvania,
see his letter of 22 April, and note 1, above.

Bidé de Chavagnes to John Adams: A Translation

[dateline] On board the Bien Aime, Brest harbor19 September 1781

[salute] My dear Sir

Although no one could tell me positively if you were in Paris back from your journeys,
I felt a desire to find out any news from you, your dear children and patriots. It
is for this honor that I have engaged myself to write to you, even if the letter has
to travel to find you. I hope very strongly that your health has not suffered from
the long and hard course that you have had, and that you have terminated your personal
affairs advantageously as well as those of your country, which could not be in better
hands. As for me, I am a bit tired of my maritime journeys. Without being or having
been ill, I arrived at Cádiz with the Spanish gentlemen. Our crossing was not as { 492 } happy as the one we made with La Motte-Picquet, because, since La Sensible, it is true that I have been given second rank on one of the worst sailing ships
of all of our ports. We have not been able to join a single merchant ship in the fleet.
I have taken it in good part however. I would like to leave this ship, but I do not
think I could succeed in doing so except to visit Madame Chavagnes. I have ruined
myself in the eyes of M. de Sartine and I regret that your little captain has little
influence now. I do not have any that would enable me to go to see you in Paris. As
a result of this, I asked for leave last winter, but I was refused. I truly wish for
peace or a truce so that I may leave this life that I have loved. But first, before
leaving, I would like to be the one to take you back to your loved ones in Boston.
This would give me the most indescribable pleasure. I ask for the continuation of
your esteem and friendship, which I cherish very much, and at the same time I reiterate
the assurance of my sincere and respectful attachment with which I have the honor
to be for life, my dear sir, your very humble and very obedient servant,

John Thaxter to C. W. F. Dumas

I have a particular Satisfaction in assuring you, Sir, that the health of Mr. Adams
has greatly recovered. I have shewn him your Letters. He is much obliged by your Kind
attention, and has charged me to present you his Respects, and to inform you, that
he should be very happy to See Mr. Dumas at Amsterdam, whenever it Shall be convenient
for him to come. His Sickness has been Short, but very violent, and I am happy to
say that his Recovery is more Speedy than could have been expected.

We have nothing of great Importance from America of late, excepting that our affairs
in every part wear an agreable complexion.

My best Respects to Madame Dumas and Daughter.

In Expectation of the honor of soon Seeing you here, I have that of being with the
greatest Respect, Sir, your most obedient & most humble Servant.